From: Jimmy Wales jwales@bomis.com Reply-To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Zog is back as Anti-Zog Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 04:33:20 -0700
I think we need to revisit having the ability for sysops to ban logged in users. Maybe the wiki way of doing this is to put the ability into the software, but all sysops must agree to use it *only* to ban *certain* variants on a known banned troll.
In the current case, it seems clear to me that banning Zog, Anti-Zog, Baboon Mouth, JamesERay, and so on, should be done virtually instantly, so as to discourage the behavior.
I agree. But how do we implement it? We could create the concept of a "trusted user", perhaps defined in terms of number of edits and joining date. If a user is not "trusted", a sysop can ban him/her. But ideally the sysop should be able to also block the IP address. Here's an idea: maybe the IPs of users could be available to sysops, but in encrypted form. So instead of banning 152.163.189.233, we ban 675C4216 (possibly using slightly better encryption than that).
-- Tim Starling.
_________________________________________________________________ MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp
Tim Starling wrote:
I agree. But how do we implement it?
Nothing fancy, just implement it more or less the same way we have the ability to ban non-logged-in users.
The sysop clicks on 'block', and then the system says "This is a logged in user, so don't do this unless you're really prepared to take the heat for it. This has to be an emergency situation to ban someone who is doing something really egregious right now, or to ban someone who you are *certain* is one of our usual suspects. Abuse this, and you'll face the wrath of the community! No cupcakes for you at the annual convention!"
And then, conceivably, it also has a checkbox for: Block IP too?
At that point, both the username block and the ip block would show up in the usual log, so that the action is open to public scrutiny.
Keeping things like this simple and not having the code enforce a particular solution seems like a good idea to me.
This is the second time now that we've had an emergency where some jerk logs in again and again.
--Jimbo
From: "Tim Starling" ts4294967296@hotmail.com Reply-To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 21:55:24 +1000 To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Zog is back as Anti-Zog
From: Jimmy Wales jwales@bomis.com Reply-To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Zog is back as Anti-Zog Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 04:33:20 -0700
I think we need to revisit having the ability for sysops to ban logged in users. Maybe the wiki way of doing this is to put the ability into the software, but all sysops must agree to use it *only* to ban *certain* variants on a known banned troll.
In the current case, it seems clear to me that banning Zog, Anti-Zog, Baboon Mouth, JamesERay, and so on, should be done virtually instantly, so as to discourage the behavior.
I agree. But how do we implement it? We could create the concept of a "trusted user", perhaps defined in terms of number of edits and joining date. If a user is not "trusted", a sysop can ban him/her. But ideally the sysop should be able to also block the IP address. Here's an idea: maybe the IPs of users could be available to sysops, but in encrypted form. So instead of banning 152.163.189.233, we ban 675C4216 (possibly using slightly better encryption than that).
-- Tim Starling.
I think we are talking about extreme cases here, even with Adam and his clones it took a while to be sure we were dealing with one. This Zog is not even posing as a legitimate user. (If I accurately understand the nature of his edits).
Fred