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