I've been blocked from editing Wikipedia from a university connection for over three months now, since the IP block stops traffic from the entire state of Maine's library/school system. Are four-month blocks really an accepted part of policy, for a system that blocks established users along with anonymous users from contributing?
On 3/21/06, wiki.pedia.WiseFool@spamgourmet.com < wiki.pedia.WiseFool@spamgourmet.com> wrote:
I've been blocked from editing Wikipedia from a university connection for over three months now, since the IP block stops traffic from the entire state of Maine's library/school system. Are four-month blocks really an accepted part of policy, for a system that blocks established users along with anonymous users from contributing?
It's a shared IP, and that block is too long for a shared IP. What's the IP?
User:Hall Monitor claimed on the IP's talk page yesterday that the block was requested by the network's administrators. No link to any documentation of this.
On 3/21/06, wiki.pedia.WiseFool@spamgourmet.com wiki.pedia.WiseFool@spamgourmet.com wrote:
I've been blocked from editing Wikipedia from a university connection for over three months now, since the IP block stops traffic from the entire state of Maine's library/school system. Are four-month blocks really an accepted part of policy, for a system that blocks established users along with anonymous users from contributing?
Could you tell us what IPs this is regarding?
-Matt
Matt Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/21/06, wiki.pedia.WiseFool@spamgourmet.com wrote:
I've been blocked from editing Wikipedia from a university connection for over three months now, since the IP block stops traffic from the entire state of Maine's library/school system. Are four-month blocks really an accepted part of policy, for a system that blocks established users along with anonymous users from contributing?
Could you tell us what IPs this is regarding?
-Matt
It's 169.244.143.115. Blocking that blocks every public computer in the whole state, apparently.
Four months just seems excessive. I thought there was a maximum length for blocks on IP's that are shared, like by public libraries and schools.
On Mar 25, 2006, at 6:12 PM, wiki.pedia.WiseFool@spamgourmet.com wrote:
It's 169.244.143.115. Blocking that blocks every public computer in the whole state, apparently.
Four months just seems excessive. I thought there was a maximum length for blocks on IP's that are shared, like by public libraries and schools.
There is. On the other hand, if we clearly see only bad contributions from an IP, we might block it before we realize what we've blocked. Our bad. Has someone fixed this now?
-Phil
wiki.pedia.WiseFool@spamgourmet.com wrote:
Matt Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/21/06, wiki.pedia.WiseFool@spamgourmet.com wrote:
I've been blocked from editing Wikipedia from a university connection for over three months now, since the IP block stops traffic from the entire state of Maine's library/school system. Are four-month blocks really an accepted part of policy, for a system that blocks established users along with anonymous users from contributing?
Could you tell us what IPs this is regarding?
-Matt
It's 169.244.143.115. Blocking that blocks every public computer in the whole state, apparently.
Four months just seems excessive. I thought there was a maximum length for blocks on IP's that are shared, like by public libraries and schools.
You assume we're omniscient. We're not. There's no way for us to know whether any given IP is used by a single user or by an entire state. You're the first person who's informed us of this.
On 3/25/06, Ben McIlwain cydeweys@gmail.com wrote:
You assume we're omniscient. We're not. There's no way for us to know whether any given IP is used by a single user or by an entire state. You're the first person who's informed us of this.
Actually not, if you read [[User talk:169.244.143.115]].
-Matt
It's 169.244.143.115. Blocking that blocks every public computer in the whole state, apparently.
Four months just seems excessive. I thought there was a maximum length for blocks on IP's that are shared, like by public libraries and schools.
You assume we're omniscient. We're not. There's no way for us to know whether any given IP is used by a single user or by an entire state. You're the first person who's informed us of this.
He is not assuming that. He is assuming that you have done your homework.
$ whois 169.244.143.115
OrgName: Maine Libraries/Dept. of Education ....
If that is to hard for you, I suggest you leave the whole blocking business to someone else.
-- mvh Björn
On 3/26/06, BJörn Lindqvist bjourne@gmail.com wrote:
It's 169.244.143.115. Blocking that blocks every public computer in the whole state, apparently.
Four months just seems excessive. I thought there was a maximum length for blocks on IP's that are shared, like by public libraries and schools.
You assume we're omniscient. We're not. There's no way for us to know whether any given IP is used by a single user or by an entire state. You're the first person who's informed us of this.
He is not assuming that. He is assuming that you have done your homework.
$ whois 169.244.143.115
OrgName: Maine Libraries/Dept. of Education ....
If that is to hard for you, I suggest you leave the whole blocking business to someone else.
BJörn, if communicating on this list in a civil way is too hard for you, I suggest you leave the whole communication business to someone else.
Jay.
You assume we're omniscient. We're not. There's no way for us to know whether any given IP is used by a single user or by an entire state. You're the first person who's informed us of this.
He is not assuming that. He is assuming that you have done your homework.
$ whois 169.244.143.115
OrgName: Maine Libraries/Dept. of Education ....
If that is to hard for you, I suggest you leave the whole blocking business to someone else.
BJörn, if communicating on this list in a civil way is too hard for you, I suggest you leave the whole communication business to someone else.
Jay.
Jayjg, what a stunningly insightful remark, I'm amazed. However, I think you are wrong. If communicating on this list in a civil way was too hard for me, I believe I would have told you to "Fuck off" or maybe "Go fuck yourself." Since that is not the case, communicating in a civil way is obviously not too hard for me.
Best regards -- mvh Björn
On 3/27/06, BJörn Lindqvist bjourne@gmail.com wrote:
You assume we're omniscient. We're not. There's no way for us to know whether any given IP is used by a single user or by an entire state. You're the first person who's informed us of this.
He is not assuming that. He is assuming that you have done your homework.
$ whois 169.244.143.115
OrgName: Maine Libraries/Dept. of Education ....
If that is to hard for you, I suggest you leave the whole blocking business to someone else.
BJörn, if communicating on this list in a civil way is too hard for you, I suggest you leave the whole communication business to someone else.
Jay.
Jayjg, what a stunningly insightful remark, I'm amazed. However, I think you are wrong. If communicating on this list in a civil way was too hard for me, I believe I would have told you to "Fuck off" or maybe "Go fuck yourself." Since that is not the case, communicating in a civil way is obviously not too hard for me.
If you imagine that civility consists of refraining from telling someone to "go fuck themselves", then there's little I can say.
Jay.
He is not assuming that. He is assuming that you have done your homework.
$ whois 169.244.143.115
OrgName: Maine Libraries/Dept. of Education
BJörn, if communicating on this list in a civil way is too hard for you, I suggest you leave the whole communication business to someone else.
Jayjg, what a stunningly insightful remark, I'm amazed. However, I think you are wrong. If communicating on this list in a civil way was too hard for me, I believe I would have told you to "Fuck off" or maybe "Go fuck yourself." Since that is not the case, communicating in a civil way is obviously not too hard for me.
If you imagine that civility consists of refraining from telling someone to "go fuck themselves", then there's little I can say.
I'm more interested in discussing why it is a customary condoned practice for admins to block IP:s when they have no idea how many people their block might effect and when they haven't even done the most basic checkup (whois). I think that it would be good if those that do it is told that it is unacceptable and irresponsible. Discussions about my character does not belong on this mailing list, you can instead use my email address if you wish to go on.
-- mvh Björn
On 3/27/06, BJörn Lindqvist bjourne@gmail.com wrote:
Jayjg, what a stunningly insightful remark, I'm amazed. However, I think you are wrong. If communicating on this list in a civil way was too hard for me, I believe I would have told you to "Fuck off" or maybe "Go fuck yourself." Since that is not the case, communicating in a civil way is obviously not too hard for me.
I also think your tone in this thread is completely inappropriate.
Ryan
On 3/28/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
Anyone want to drop this, sometime about now?
Steve
Yes, let's.
Ryan
I've given up editing from work as I have to unblock the shared IP every time I want to rollback some vandalism. Frankly I think that it's pathetic that this known issue has never been resolved.
violet/riga
Violet/Riga wrote:
I've given up editing from work as I have to unblock the shared IP every time I want to rollback some vandalism. Frankly I think that it's pathetic that this known issue has never been resolved.
That would be 217.33.74.20, right? I think that would be an excellent candidate for the "semi-blocks" discussed in another thread. In the meanwhile, if it's a web proxy (not a firewall or router) and has been configured to provide X-Forwarded-For headers, it could perhaps be included in the [[meta:XFF project]]. (Having reverse DNS would help, though, but at least the whois records look correct.)
On 3/26/06, jayjg jayjg99@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/26/06, BJörn Lindqvist bjourne@gmail.com wrote:
It's 169.244.143.115. Blocking that blocks every public computer in the whole state, apparently.
Four months just seems excessive. I thought there was a maximum length for blocks on IP's that are shared, like by public libraries and schools.
You assume we're omniscient. We're not. There's no way for us to know whether any given IP is used by a single user or by an entire state. You're the first person who's informed us of this.
He is not assuming that. He is assuming that you have done your homework.
$ whois 169.244.143.115
OrgName: Maine Libraries/Dept. of Education ....
If that is to hard for you, I suggest you leave the whole blocking business to someone else.
BJörn, if communicating on this list in a civil way is too hard for you, I suggest you leave the whole communication business to someone else.
Bjorn's comment was perhaps a little sarcastic, but Ben's response merited such a comment -- it probably should be standard practice to whois IPs before we put blocks up.
wiki.pedia.WiseFool@spamgourmet.com wrote:
Matt Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/21/06, wiki.pedia.WiseFool@spamgourmet.com wrote:
I've been blocked from editing Wikipedia from a university connection for over three months now, since the IP block stops traffic from the entire state of Maine's library/school system. Are four-month blocks really an accepted part of policy, for a system that blocks established users along with anonymous users from contributing?
Could you tell us what IPs this is regarding?
It's 169.244.143.115. Blocking that blocks every public computer in the whole state, apparently.
Tim, could you check if this a candidate for the trusted XFF list. The IP resolves as CE2-P-UNET.unet.maine.edu, which looks trustworthy enough for me.
Ilmari Karonen wrote:
wiki.pedia.WiseFool@spamgourmet.com wrote:
Matt Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/21/06, wiki.pedia.WiseFool@spamgourmet.com wrote:
I've been blocked from editing Wikipedia from a university connection for over three months now, since the IP block stops traffic from the entire state of Maine's library/school system. Are four-month blocks really an accepted part of policy, for a system that blocks established users along with anonymous users from contributing?
Could you tell us what IPs this is regarding?
It's 169.244.143.115. Blocking that blocks every public computer in the whole state, apparently.
Tim, could you check if this a candidate for the trusted XFF list. The IP resolves as CE2-P-UNET.unet.maine.edu, which looks trustworthy enough for me.
There's no XFF header. I'll send an email asking them to change their configuration once I work out who to send it to.
-- Tim Starling
Fred Bauer @ Sat Mar 25 15:21:55 UTC 2006:
Who blocked you? What is the stated reason? Fred
Hall Monitor blocked this IP way back in January. His block message said to "have your system administrator contact me," but it's the whole state's IP, so I had no idea who to contact.
Phil Sandifer @ Sun Mar 26 00:09:15 UTC 2006:
There is. On the other hand, if we clearly see only bad contributions from an IP, we might block it before we realize what we've blocked. Our bad. Has someone fixed this now? -Phil
Yes, it's been unblocked now. (btw: Thanks to JDoorjam for doing that.)
Who blocked you? What is the stated reason?
Fred
On Mar 21, 2006, at 11:10 AM, wiki.pedia.WiseFool@spamgourmet.com wrote:
I've been blocked from editing Wikipedia from a university connection for over three months now, since the IP block stops traffic from the entire state of Maine's library/school system. Are four-month blocks really an accepted part of policy, for a system that blocks established users along with anonymous users from contributing?
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l