1) Allow sysops to check the IP of new contributors 2) Allow sysops to block new contributors by IP/name 3) Have IP blocks expire after a definable amount of time 4) Use an additional cookie-based "soft blocking" mechanism that should fool the technically challenged. 5) In order to increase sysop accountability, log all sysop actions in the recent_changes (e.g. user:foo banned, page xyz protected)
I agree with these as long as there's no other new cookie use or java use; I despise them both. I do think it's legitimate to block people trying to vandalize, and I think that one vandalism incident is PLENTY enough, IF IT IS TRULY VANDALISM. For instance, cutting and pasting something from one page to another completely unrelated page is obvious vandalism, or inserting a sentence such as "You are gay" is obvious vandalism. However, in some of these edit wars, I've looked at some older versions and sometimes can't figure out what people were getting so upset about. I've mostly been impressed by the objectivity of Wikipedia results, and know that there are people editing who are both left-leaning and right-leaning, but it can still come out pretty neutral.
I do think it's a good idea, too, to set up a nonprofit and am willing to do whatever I can to help.
-- John Knouse jaknouse@frognet.net