On 11/30/2014 11:51 AM, Kathleen McCook wrote:

The only solution would be lack of anonymity. That won't fly, but it would cause the creepiness to go away.

I used to think that too. But some people don't care about people knowing who they are, what they think or who the mess with. I don't care that much about anonymity and have said a few problematic things (usually under intense harassment). Assuming he really is "Eric Corbett", he's said a lot. Sitush has outed who he really is at least three times and redacted only one, so that's widely known. Same is true for a lot of individuals, some of whom flame away just within the boundaries of NPA.

The problem is there are all sorts of harassers out there, some of them paid by govts, who will harass or come after individuals who disagree with them or who criticize their favorite program, politician, party or country.

Better would be a sliding scale of privileges depending on whether you are an IP or registered and confirmed and whether you are at least willing to admit who you are to the Foundation, including confirming via phone or skype. The latter would be mandatory to become an Admin or an Arbitrator or to retain editing privileges after violating important policies repeatedly.

This would work REALLY good to stop BLP violations which have been the biggest time sink for me, at least until GGTF. Once the Foundation knows who you are, it's really easy for pissed off subjects of trashy BLPs to get a subpoena and sue your butt.

I have a list of good ideas in formulation, some drawn from previous discussions, and one of these days soon will post here, at my carolmoore.net/wikipedia, at the new youtube site and who knows where else. (Opinion page of NY TImes? ha ha ha)

CM