My point is that we are seriously considering the viability of the "open" model. That bothers me a lot. Mark
--- Viajero viajero@quilombo.nl wrote:
On 06/17/04 at 12:56 PM, Mark Richards marich712000@yahoo.com said:
Why don't we adopt a methodology more like
Britanica?
We could choose editors, who would be accountable
to
us, then they could write articles that we'd be pleased with, and we could control the final
version?
Oh, I remember, because this is a WIKI!
Your point? Wikipedia has demonstrated that, quantitavely, it is a viable alternative to Britannica but qualitatively it is a *long way* from being its superior. The same goes for Encarta. A certain modesty would be appropriate I would have thought, particularly in view of the ongoing problems with we have trolls, vandals, POV-pushers, and all-round morons, which, in my mind, seriously brings into question the viability of the "open" model as it is currently implemented...
V. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
We are in panic mode from the Vandalbot. But it can easily be defeated with a few software changes. It creates a new user, then trashes, then creates a new user, then trashes. What is needed is a bit of software that prevents trashing an article by a new user. A real new user will not need to be moving or blanking pages anyway. They are busy learning how to use the system.
(I actually don't know exactly what Wik's bot does)
Fred
From: Mark Richards marich712000@yahoo.com Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 14:04:46 -0700 (PDT) To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] Viability of the open model
My point is that we are seriously considering the viability of the "open" model. That bothers me a lot. Mark
Are the edits on Village Pump that exchanged s for i the vandal bot?
Fred
From: Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 16:13:09 -0600 To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Viability of the open model
(I actually don't know exactly what Wik's bot does)
Yes. But those are the kinds of things that are easy to revert, at least when they're not in conjunction with other attacks, like the moves.
moink
On Thu, 17 Jun 2004, Fred Bauder wrote:
Are the edits on Village Pump that exchanged s for i the vandal bot?
Fred
From: Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 16:13:09 -0600 To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Viability of the open model
(I actually don't know exactly what Wik's bot does)
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 16:13:09 -0600, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
We are in panic mode from the Vandalbot. But it can easily be defeated with a few software changes. It creates a new user, then trashes, then creates a new user, then trashes. What is needed is a bit of software that prevents trashing an article by a new user. A real new user will not need to be moving or blanking pages anyway. They are busy learning how to use the system.
Some web login systems oblige a user to type in some letters or numbers from a graphic which is designed to be readable by a human but not by a program. In this way, programs that attempt to automate registration can be defeated.
(I actually don't know exactly what Wik's bot does)
Me neither.
phil hunt wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 16:13:09 -0600, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
We are in panic mode from the Vandalbot. But it can easily be defeated with a few software changes. It creates a new user, then trashes, then creates a new user, then trashes. What is needed is a bit of software that prevents trashing an article by a new user. A real new user will not need to be moving or blanking pages anyway. They are busy learning how to use the system.
Yes, phil is correct.
I think this is a little step that would not cost a lot. It would not bother a human too much and add a layer of protection. During registration, display a little image, with an number in it (something simple, number 1 to 9 randomly), and ask the user to enter this number in an empty field.
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 07:20:57 +0200, Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
Yes, phil is correct.
I think this is a little step that would not cost a lot. It would not bother a human too much and add a layer of protection. During registration, display a little image, with an number in it (something simple, number 1 to 9 randomly), and ask the user to enter this number in an empty field.
You'd want more than one number, because a bot could guess it right one out of 10 times, and it would be trivial to run the bot multiple times until it succeeds.
Fred Bauder wrote:
The argument is that it is not necessary, after all, he is gone. There is no longer any doubt that it is him.
Well let me clear that up. It's necessary, that's why I blocked his known accounts. We're restricting the actions that can be taken with new accounts, and the actions that can be taken with existing accounts are sufficiently dangerous to warrant blocking.
We are in panic mode from the Vandalbot. But it can easily be defeated with a few software changes. It creates a new user, then trashes, then creates a new user, then trashes. What is needed is a bit of software that prevents trashing an article by a new user. A real new user will not need to be moving or blanking pages anyway. They are busy learning how to use the system.
(I actually don't know exactly what Wik's bot does)
We already put in a filter for page blanking, that's why he switched to letter replacement.
-- Tim Starling