On 10/26/07, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:
After a one month period, on December 9th, we will re-evaluate this decision using previously established methods (average article lifespan, rate of deletion, manual quality classification, random samplings of newly created articles, and most importantly, community discussion). If there is evidence of harm, anonymous page creation will be disabled to collect more data and provide time for discussion. If there is no significant evidence of harm, the issue will be evaluated again after six months. Further milestones and actions may be proposed at that time.
Seems like a fine plan. I was never really of the opinion that blocking anons would help issues like Seigenthaler. Seemed more like a PR thing to do. Coupled with the real concern that anons want the ability, mentioned by others, this seems like about time.