On 10/12/07, Flameviper Velifang <theflameysnake(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
Did you read my message? The point is that you cannot simply presume
things. Perhaps they can't use e-mail or create an account elsewhere. Maybe
they can.
Can't use email? Doubtful. Anybody can create an anonymous, free email
account with Yahoo, Hotmail, Gmail, and so on, in a matter of minutes.
Requests coming from such addresses are generally only declined if there's
some reason to suspect foul play, in my experience.
I agree that we should try and streamline the process. I agree that blocking
account creation on shared and widely shared IPs isn't something to be taken
lightly, especially done in the long term. But when it's done, it should be
done specifically in order *to* create a roadblock -- we're trying to keep
some abusive idiot(s) out, after all.
But the point isn't the technical feasability of creating an account, it's
the image we project of ourselves.
Those are both important avenues of discussion, I think.
One thing to keep in mind, there's no other site on the net which makes
itself this prominent, this available, this open; because of this open,
anonymous nature, the tools with which we close off access in cases of abuse
can wind up being rather blunt and cumbersome. Without the cooperation of
school and/or ISP staff, there's sometimes no option but blocking.
Should we be concerned that we may be locking out genuine, earnest
contributors? Absolutely. But at some point, there has to be some limit to
the level of abuse we're willing to have thrown our way. Surely people can
understand that. From experience on unblock-en-l, the majority of upset
people emailing us are upset because they feel personally accused by the
block messages they're seeing -- that's something I'd definitely like to
avoid, whenever possible.
That doesn't account for discouraged people, necessarily. But what are we to
do? What productive, all-encompassing solution is there, here?
There are cases in which blocking account creation is appropriate, and cases
in which it isn't. It all depends on potentials, costs and benefits.
Individual cases can be discussed, but in terms of a general change in
policy, I don't think there's a silver bullet.