Tim Starling wrote:
>I suggest you get a username, if you don't
already have one, and tell us
>what it is. The development team will be able to override the IP blocking
>for you personally. This will allow us to continue to block Michael, and
>will also give us an obvious course of action if you turn out to be just
>another Michael pseudonym trying to get the previous pseudonyms unblocked.
>If you're currently an anonymous contributor
and you're anxious about
>getting a username, keep in mind that users with usernames have much
better
>privacy protection in place than
"anonymous" users.
If I remember rightly, daniwo59(a)aol.com is User:Danny, a longstanding
contributor and a sysop
The problem is that a block will stop all users on that IP, logged in or
not. The only reason sysops can't block logged in users is that they don't
know the relevant IP numbers (aside from the policy reasons of course)
I know the cookie idea will hopefully help with banning people like Michael,
bypassing the need for an IP block - but could it work the other way too?
I'm not technical so I don't know if this is feasable or not, but could we
have a "trusted user" cookie. One that allowed trusted users to skip any
block on the IP they are using? It woldn't be needed for most users, but
would overrule an IP block in cases like Danny's.
Anyway, as I say, I have no idea if this is possible or desirable
Regards,
sannse