On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 9:06 PM, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hoi,
The number of edits of an account has been a consideration in that the one
with the biggest numbers can have the price. With 6000 edits a user can be
found with less edits then a user from another project. By giving
precedence
to admins of projects a new ballgame may exist. There are many people in
this group who are active in MANY wikis and when you combine their number
of
edits, you may find really high numbers.
I do not think that usurpation policies should be determined by individual
projects. There are too many of them, some 700, and consequently things
would break down.
Thanks,
GerardM
The principle behind enwiki's policy is still reasonable though.
Attribution is a fundemental legal expectation under the GFDL. We attribute
edits under our self-chosen psuedonyms. I'm not convinced that
involuntarily renaming accounts that have an established edit history is
either ethical or legal.
I know the SUL proposal has been to give the account to the most established
user, but it's not clear to me that doing so is appropriate. An unfortunate
consequence of that is that some popular names might never be unified, but
personally, I'm inclined to think that the only way to be fair to some
existing users may well be to frustrate others.
-Robert Rohde