I expected the new software to include the feature we've all been asking for, that would block a user from "all pages but his own talk page" - or "all pages but a few specific ones". The purpose of this was to enable a user to protest a block - without having to create a new account or find a new ISP.
Pending development of this feature, why not: (1) Unblock the user account. (2) Requent the user to confine his edits to his user talk page (and possibly a short list of other pages) (3) Watch his contribs, and instantly revert and edits outside his assigned scope. (4) Re-block his account if #3 becomes tedious.
This is bending over backwards to be fair. And I wouldn't mind being the first to try it - if enough others think the experiment is worth trying.
Kindly ol' Uncle Ed (User:Ed Poor) Chairman (pro tem), Mediation Committee Admin, Bureaucrat, Developer Emeritus, wikien-l admin, etc., etc.
-----Original Message----- From: MacGyverMagic/Mgm [mailto:macgyvermagic@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 5:32 AM To: English Wikipedia Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Abuse of admin powers by David Gerard and Snowspinner
On 7/6/05, Norath Norath norath2005@yahoo.com wrote:
User:Norrath was block by David Gerard for "admitted sockpuppet and role account". This account is indeed a sockpuppet of a
user in good
standing, created to protest other blocks caaried out abusively by Snowspinner.
Regardless of whether a block was within policy or not, creating another account to circumvent it is against policy. This is especially what the list was made for and if you asked to be unblocked while citing relevant sections of policy, I'm sure you could get a lot more admins to unblock you if you contacted them privately, than when you go straight to accusations of abuse.
--Mgm
On 7/7/05, Poor, Edmund W Edmund.W.Poor@abc.com wrote:
I expected the new software to include the feature we've all been asking for, that would block a user from "all pages but his own talk page" - or "all pages but a few specific ones". The purpose of this was to enable a user to protest a block - without having to create a new account or find a new ISP.
Pending development of this feature, why not: (1) Unblock the user account. (2) Requent the user to confine his edits to his user talk page (and possibly a short list of other pages) (3) Watch his contribs, and instantly revert and edits outside his assigned scope. (4) Re-block his account if #3 becomes tedious.
This is bending over backwards to be fair. And I wouldn't mind being the first to try it - if enough others think the experiment is worth trying.
Kindly ol' Uncle Ed (User:Ed Poor) Chairman (pro tem), Mediation Committee Admin, Bureaucrat, Developer Emeritus, wikien-l admin, etc., etc.
Since you mentioned "if enough others think the experiment is worth trying", I'll mention that I think this idea is a good one, and well worth trying.
I expected the new software to include the feature we've all been asking for, that would block a user from "all pages but his own talk page" - or "all pages but a few specific ones". The purpose of this was to enable a user to protest a block - without having to create a new account or find a new ISP.
Since the months old bug report regarding the reblock thing isn't going anywhere, I was planning on submitting a patch for it myself over the next week or so. I may implement this "partial block" as a patch too. These seem like they should be fairly simple to implement, if anyone else has any other ideas for experimental features related to this that are fairly simple I could do those too.
---------------------------------------------- Nathan J. Yoder http://www.gummibears.nu/ http://www.gummibears.nu/files/njyoder_pgp.key ----------------------------------------------
Poor, Edmund W wrote:
I expected the new software to include the feature we've all been asking for, that would block a user from "all pages but his own talk page" - or "all pages but a few specific ones". The purpose of this was to enable a user to protest a block - without having to create a new account or find a new ISP.
Pending development of this feature, why not: (1) Unblock the user account. (2) Requent the user to confine his edits to his user talk page (and possibly a short list of other pages) (3) Watch his contribs, and instantly revert and edits outside his assigned scope. (4) Re-block his account if #3 becomes tedious.
This is bending over backwards to be fair. And I wouldn't mind being the first to try it - if enough others think the experiment is worth trying.
I could do a quick hack to allow blocked users to edit their own talk page, if that's what you want. It's a much simpler feature to the other thing I'm working on at the moment, i.e. per-article blocking.
-- Tim Starling
Tim Starling (t.starling@physics.unimelb.edu.au) [050708 02:21]:
Poor, Edmund W wrote:
I expected the new software to include the feature we've all been asking for, that would block a user from "all pages but his own talk page" - or "all pages but a few specific ones". The purpose of this was to enable a user to protest a block - without having to create a new account or find a new ISP. Pending development of this feature, why not: (1) Unblock the user account. (2) Requent the user to confine his edits to his user talk page (and possibly a short list of other pages) (3) Watch his contribs, and instantly revert and edits outside his assigned scope. (4) Re-block his account if #3 becomes tedious. This is bending over backwards to be fair. And I wouldn't mind being the first to try it - if enough others think the experiment is worth trying.
I could do a quick hack to allow blocked users to edit their own talk page, if that's what you want. It's a much simpler feature to the other thing I'm working on at the moment, i.e. per-article blocking.
That'd be great, actually. IMO. How's the 1.5 beta bug load going?
- d.
On 7/7/05, Tim Starling t.starling@physics.unimelb.edu.au wrote:
I could do a quick hack to allow blocked users to edit their own talk page, if that's what you want. It's a much simpler feature to the other thing I'm working on at the moment, i.e. per-article blocking.
Some people will use that to replace their talk pages with technically challenging content (e.g. two megabyte uploads, or pages filled with hundreds of animated images). But I think we can deal with that in the long run.
Kelly
Kelly Martin (kelly.lynn.martin@gmail.com) [050708 03:02]:
On 7/7/05, Tim Starling t.starling@physics.unimelb.edu.au wrote:
I could do a quick hack to allow blocked users to edit their own talk page, if that's what you want. It's a much simpler feature to the other thing I'm working on at the moment, i.e. per-article blocking.
Some people will use that to replace their talk pages with technically challenging content (e.g. two megabyte uploads, or pages filled with hundreds of animated images). But I think we can deal with that in the long run.
Lock the page if need be?
- d.
David Gerard wrote:
Kelly Martin (kelly.lynn.martin@gmail.com) [050708 03:02]:
On 7/7/05, Tim Starling t.starling@physics.unimelb.edu.au wrote:
I could do a quick hack to allow blocked users to edit their own talk page, if that's what you want. It's a much simpler feature to the other thing I'm working on at the moment, i.e. per-article blocking.
This is done, enabled on en only. It can be enabled on other wikis on request.
Some people will use that to replace their talk pages with technically challenging content (e.g. two megabyte uploads, or pages filled with hundreds of animated images). But I think we can deal with that in the long run.
Lock the page if need be?
Yes, protection is the way to deal with this.
-- Tim Starling
What a brilliant move. Thank you, Tim. :)
~Mark Ryan
On 7/8/05, Tim Starling t.starling@physics.unimelb.edu.au wrote:
David Gerard wrote:
Kelly Martin (kelly.lynn.martin@gmail.com) [050708 03:02]:
On 7/7/05, Tim Starling t.starling@physics.unimelb.edu.au wrote:
I could do a quick hack to allow blocked users to edit their own talk page, if that's what you want. It's a much simpler feature to the other thing I'm working on at the moment, i.e. per-article blocking.
This is done, enabled on en only. It can be enabled on other wikis on request.
Some people will use that to replace their talk pages with technically challenging content (e.g. two megabyte uploads, or pages filled with hundreds of animated images). But I think we can deal with that in the long run.
Lock the page if need be?
Yes, protection is the way to deal with this.
-- Tim Starling
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Replying to myself again...
I could do a quick hack to allow blocked users to edit their own talk page, if that's what you want. It's a much simpler feature to the other thing I'm working on at the moment, i.e. per-article blocking.
This is done, enabled on en only. It can be enabled on other wikis on request.
Anyone willing to defend this should go to http://tinyurl.com/8bxwp , because it's heading for a quick demise.
-- Tim Starling