It's intriguing (to me) to contemplate how the notion of restricting IP editing in
specific circumstances is often viewed as a violation of principle, even when supported by
examples or data, yet a restriction like requiring long-standing users to jump through
hoops just to use a VPN for privacy—something standard nowadays—is considered necessary
and acceptable. Both policies aim to address issues while weighing the pros and cons and
inevitably curbing some degree of freedom.
Personally, I question the efficiency of the VPN restriction. I hold a different
perspective: implementing a one or two-year, 100-500-edit registration threshold for
automatic exemption of registered users seems reasonable.
Nevertheless, it's important to recognize that nothing is inherently necessary; these
are always political and not technical choices.
It's not just vandals ruining it; it's also the approach taken. By granting trolls
immense power to disrupt everyone's activities, you fuel their mischief. Thus, every
time these extreme measures are enforced and standardized, they inevitably lead to wasted
time and endless debates about the status quo, and regular users pay a price. Not
hypothetically, for real.... we know. Whoever prioritizes the pursuit of trolls and
vandals over the work of regular users, de facto feeds the troll.
It's important to clarify: as seasoned users, many of us have kinda learned to
navigate this "mess" and endure it... similar issues have been grappled with for
years, Commons management shows little sign of improvement and we just don't care
anymore.
However, for those who haven't mastered it or are stuck in some nationwide quagmire as
this one, suggesting VPNs as a solution is impractical—unless you anticipate tens of
thousands of users from a country with millions of inhabitants to individually request IP
exemptions. It's evident that the log of such a system would not be sustainable.
I remain skeptical that an alternative solution will be implemented, given the likelihood
that the approach will mirror that of the VPN case or other instances—utilizing massive
and/or indefinite self-referential strict measures that are seldom evaluated on the long
term with some metrics.
Il martedì 19 marzo 2024 alle ore 20:24:15 CET, Neurodivergent Netizen
<idoh.idreamofhorses(a)gmail.com> ha scritto:
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org Unfortunately,
there’s a history of an overwhelming amount of vandals using VPNs to, well, vandalize
Wikipedia, hence the block on known VPN and the bureaucracy surrounding them. If the block
is removed, it’ll quite likely become a problem again. It really is a situation of people
behaving poorly ruining it for everyone.
From,I dream of horsesShe/her
On Mar 19, 2024, at 12:17 PM, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
<wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
That doesn't seem logical or fair. If a user is registered and not already blocked,
the IPs they are using shouldn't matter at all.
Personally, I've never used a VPN before I got it this way (even living in the PRC),
but I understand that some people might need to do so for privacy reasons. So, this
restriction should be removed. Registered users should have the freedom to access the
platform how they want. If there's an issue with a specific user, it's more
appropriate to block their username rather than restricting their access when logged in
based on IP addresses. Adding more bureaucracy isn't the solution if there isn't a
problem to begin with.
In any case, nothing will probably change. But please don't say that VPN is a
solution. People have already enough problems that adding more and more passages.
Il martedì 19 marzo 2024 alle ore 19:51:42 CET, Neurodivergent Netizen
<idoh.idreamofhorses(a)gmail.com> ha scritto:
A few years ago, I acquired a VPN as part of an antivirus package. However, when I tried
to use it for other services, I encountered an unexpected issue switching on wiki
platforms: despite being there as a registered user, I found myself unable to edit them.
So how can VPN be a solution?
Right, you would’ve had to use IP block exemption, which would require some level of trust
from the community that you aren’t a vandal or other blocked user trying to circumspect
said block.
From,I dream of horsesShe/her
On Mar 19, 2024, at 11:23 AM, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
<wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
Why is there so much discussion about using VPNs as a solution? A few years ago, I
acquired a VPN as part of an antivirus package. However, when I tried to use it for other
services, I encountered an unexpected issue switching on wiki platforms: despite being
there as a registered user, I found myself unable to edit them.
So how can VPN be a solution?
A.
Il martedì 19 marzo 2024 alle ore 18:17:52 CET, Saqib Qayyum
<saqibqayyumc(a)gmail.com> ha scritto:
Hello Mr James
Certainly, using a VPN is a workaround, but it's worth noting that obtaining an IP
block exemption is still necessary to edit Commons, and this is not always feasible for
all users. Many may not even be aware of its existence. For instance, I couldn't edit
Commons since October 2020 until I discovered the option for IP ban exemption. .
And because of this, contributions to Commons from Pakistan have significantly dwindled.
For instance, I recall organizing Wiki Loves Monuments Pakistan from 2014, where we used
to receive thousands of images annually. However, in recent years, the number of uploads
has drastically declined, with only a maximum of 100 photos being uploaded each year. This
trend underscores the challenges Pakistani users face in accessing and contributing to the
site.
--Saqib Qayyum
On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 9:55 PM James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Can you not just use a VPN?
James
On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 9:29 PM Saqib Qayyum <saqibqayyumc(a)gmail.com> wrote:
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
I am writing to you as a concerned volunteer from Pakistan regarding a critical issue that
has been persisting for several years now. Despite multiple attempts to communicate this
matter to members of the WMF's communication team, there has been a disappointing lack
of response or acknowledgment.
For the past several years, Commons has been blocked in Pakistan. While Wikipedia was
briefly blocked last year, the swift response from both Pakistani and international news
media led to its unblocking. However, the blockade of Commons, being a less prominent site
in comparison, has gone largely unnoticed.
Furthermore, several journalists I have spoken to have also expressed frustration over
their attempts to reach out to WMF staff regarding this issue, only to receive no
response.
I urge the WMF to prioritize this matter and take immediate action to address the ongoing
blockage of Commons in Pakistan.
Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter. --
Saqib
Qayyumhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Saqib
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
--
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org