Tim Starling wrote:
This greatly increases the cost to vandals, and reduces the cost to us.
I think that's exactly the right evaluation metric to use in cases like this, although we should of course factor in the costs associated with the risk that we may end up using the new feature in ways contrary to our spirit of openness.
That said, the worst-case scenario of a vandalbot is always in the back of my mind. This feature cuts off the simplest kinds of vandalbots, and slows down the more advanced ones, meaning that they cause less damage in the time it takes for a developer to respond.
Sure, but the great irony is that if someone did attack us in some more sophisticated way, the net result would not be to shut us down, but to force us to abandon one of our ideals of anonymous edits and instant-signup-edits.
We could always introduce waiting periods on signups before they can edit, etc., etc. What a horrible and sad day that would be, though.
--Jimbo