There is also the fact that an admin bot account can be compromised, I think I would be easier for an admin to run the bot in their admin account, one less account to worry about, its not like you need a bot flag for one delete a day.
Chris
On Jan 18, 2008 3:28 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 18/01/2008, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 18/01/2008, Tim Starling tstarling@wikimedia.org wrote:
What's wrong with giving bots sysop access? Are you worried they might rise up and overthrow the human sysops?
More or less. There's lots of paranoia on en:wp about admin bots going batshit in sorcerer's apprentice mode. Though I don't think it's warranted, as *anything* an admin can do is easily reversible except history merges. (Making those *easily* reversible is one for the wishlist.)
But that's not true when bots are involved. A human can only screw up at roughly the same speed as another human can fix it, so it's not a big deal, but a bot can screw up a million times in a few minutes - that's not practically reversible without using another bot to undo it all, which takes a lot of preparation (the bot needs to be written, tested to make sure it's not going to screw things up even more, and approved - that's likely to take a day or so at least).
Personally, I wouldn't object to open source admin bots ("With enough eyes, all bugs are shallow." or whatever the quote it), but closed source ones are too likely to go wrong and are thus too risky (the chance of them going wrong is still quite small, but the potential damage is enormous, so the risk is still high). Also, an open source bot can probably be modified by any programmer to fix its own mistakes quite easily, doing that with a closed source bot requires the author. (So a closed source, supervised bot wouldn't be so bad, but I'd still rather not have them.)
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l