On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 7:05 PM, Morten Warncke-Wang <morten(a)cs.umn.edu> wrote:
The major difference from our perspective is how
applications for new
accounts would be handled. Our idea is to be able to hand out
accounts based around the likelihood of effective research, rather
than on visibility within Wikipedia, or on the usefulness of the
resulting tool to the larger Wikipedia community. The latter two
cases are already handled well by the existing toolserver and its
application process. Accounts on the research toolserver would be
approved based on the quality of the research ideas, and the ability
of the proposing team to carry out the research.
As far as I know, the account approval process on the toolserver is
fairly lax. As long as you have some credible Wikipedia-related
reason to use the toolserver, whether tools or research, you should be
able to get an account. Am I wrong? Have any researchers been
rejected from the toolserver?