On 8/6/07, Matthew Brown <morven(a)gmail.com> wrote:
And yes, it sucks. I am quite aware that it sucks.
However,
Wikipedia right now is in the situation where a user's originating IP
is pretty much the basis for any ability to bar editing at all for
anyone, since we have so few requirements to create an account. If we
permit anonymizing services such as Tor, we effectively no longer have
any way to block users or track them at all.
The only other functioning alternative, IMO, is to make it require a
lot more effort to qualify for an account, so that it is much harder
to create a new Wikipedia identity. I'd submit that doing that is
going to change the Wikipedia environment a heck of a lot more than
banning anonymizing proxies does. (The other alternative, which
appears to be soundly rejected, is giving up on any attempt to use
technical information about a user's internet connection and HTTP
requests to back up suspicions of sockpuppetry/resurrection).
Your analysis makes at least two major incorrect assumptions: 1) that
current IP address blocks are an effective way to stop determined
banned users (the kind that would be using TOR); and 2) that there is
no possibility for middleground between adminship and getting an
account (in technical terms, it assumes that the "ipblock-exempt" can
only be granted along with adminship).