Is that really useful, considering how easy it is to set up a yahoo/hotmail/gmail/whatever else account?
Gabe
-----Original Message----- From: mediawiki-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org [mailto:mediawiki-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Mischa Peters Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 12:28 PM To: MediaWiki announcements and site admin list Subject: Re: [Mediawiki-l] Email approval before login
Hi Kent,
[snip]
I apologize if this is really off topic for this list -- but you kind of brought up the subject by assuming that Mischa was against 'open' editing. I don't know what his wiki is about or what his policies are, but I don't think enforcing a valid email address conflicts with 'open editing.'
I am running different wiki's, one is more open then the other. But I would still like to know who is adding what and not just know their "nickname".
Mischa _______________________________________________ MediaWiki-l mailing list MediaWiki-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
Yes it would... especially since for one project I would like to lock it down to a specific domain. And opening a gmail account is an additional step that a lot of people don't want to take.
Mischa
Is that really useful, considering how easy it is to set up a yahoo/hotmail/gmail/whatever else account?
Gabe
-----Original Message----- From: mediawiki-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org [mailto:mediawiki-l-bounces@Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Mischa Peters Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 12:28 PM To: MediaWiki announcements and site admin list Subject: Re: [Mediawiki-l] Email approval before login
Hi Kent,
[snip]
I apologize if this is really off topic for this list -- but you kind of brought up the subject by assuming that Mischa was against 'open' editing. I don't know what his wiki is about or what his policies are, but I don't think enforcing a valid email address conflicts with 'open editing.'
I am running different wiki's, one is more open then the other. But I would still like to know who is adding what and not just know their "nickname".
Mischa _______________________________________________ MediaWiki-l mailing list MediaWiki-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
MediaWiki-l mailing list MediaWiki-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
No offence, but I think you answered your own question:
On 05/12/05, Mischa Peters mischa2023@gmail.com wrote:
Could someone explain to me why an email verification of the user that is about to edit on your wiki is restricting editing?!
On 05/12/05, Mischa Peters mischa2023@gmail.com wrote:
Yes it would... especially since for one project I would like to lock it down to a specific domain. And opening a gmail account is an additional step that a lot of people don't want to take.
So, you are restricting edits to those who can or will take that extra step. Whether that's good or bad is open for discussion, but surely the fact that "locking it down" is "restricting it" is as plain as day?
Meanwhile, what do you mean be locking down "to a specific domain" - do you mean that you're planning to use e-mail verification as a way of authenticating that the users already hold accounts on some other service? If so, out of curiosity, are there other possibilities (LDAP, checks in a shared database), some of which may already have been implemented?
-- Rowan Collins BSc [IMSoP]
No offence, but I think you answered your own question:
On 05/12/05, Mischa Peters mischa2023@gmail.com wrote:
Could someone explain to me why an email verification of the user that is about to edit on your wiki is restricting editing?!
No offence, how did I answer my own question? It might be considered as a restriction but I don't see why these 2 are related?
Yes it would... especially since for one project I would like to lock it down to a specific domain. And opening a gmail account is an additional step that a lot of people don't want to take.
So, you are restricting edits to those who can or will take that extra step. Whether that's good or bad is open for discussion, but surely the fact that "locking it down" is "restricting it" is as plain as day?
Maybe the definition of "restricted" means something else to different people. Personally I feel that an email verification is not a restriction. You can argue that if this is considered a restriction then there are already a lot of restrictions in place that made it in MediaWiki. Think, regsitering to the wiki. Think, disallow edit of a page when a user is not logged in. Think, read only wiki.
Meanwhile, what do you mean be locking down "to a specific domain" - do you mean that you're planning to use e-mail verification as a way of authenticating that the users already hold accounts on some other service? If so, out of curiosity, are there other possibilities (LDAP, checks in a shared database), some of which may already have been implemented?
That is a good point. I will most diffinately look at it.
Mischa
On 06/12/05, Mischa Peters mischa2023@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe the definition of "restricted" means something else to different people. Personally I feel that an email verification is not a restriction.
OK, maybe it is a definition thing. It seems to me that a change from "anyone can edit" to "anyone can edit, as long as they have an e-mail address, are willing to enter it on the form, and can be bothered to wait for the confirmation message" is reducing the pool of people who are able to edit, and therefore "restricting" it to those who meet the new criteria.
But perhaps it's more helpful to think of it in terms of removing the *ease* and *speed* of editting, which are after all what wikis excel at (hence "wiki-wiki", "quick"). Now, I'm happy for it to be up to administrators to reduce the advantages of the system like this, but I do think it would be a mistake for them to do so.
You can argue that if this is considered a restriction then there are already a lot of restrictions in place that made it in MediaWiki. Think, regsitering to the wiki. Think, disallow edit of a page when a user is not logged in. Think, read only wiki.
Yes, I personally think that the harder it is to contribute to a wiki, the less use is being made of the advantages of the wiki. A read-only or invitation-only wiki is just a CMS - a website managed and facilitated by software - and there are many many pieces of software probably *more* able to do that. Does that mean no-one should be allowed to adapt MediaWiki for such a role? Of course not, and no doubt useful features come about largely because people use it that way. But if you want to take advantage of it being a wiki, you have to make editting easy for as many people as you think you can cope with. IMHO, of course.
-- Rowan Collins BSc [IMSoP]
mediawiki-l@lists.wikimedia.org