Apposite, but defective in a number of respects; also, explicitly advocacy
for Tor editing without really addressing the objections to it (that it's
99+% a firehose of garbage).
Rather than me reading through several pages to pick out what you might
mean, could you please quote the bits you consider particularly make a
relevant point?
- d.
On 10 June 2017 at 15:30, Cristian Consonni <cristian(a)balist.es> wrote:
Hi,
I have found now this paper that seems relevant to this conversation:
Forte, Andrea, Nazanin Andalibi, and Rachel Greenstadt
"Privacy, anonymity, and perceived risk in open collaboration: a study
of Tor users and Wikipedians."
Proceedings of Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing
(CSCW). Portland, OR. CSCW 17 (2017): 12.
http://andreaforte.net/ForteCSCW17-Anonymity.pdf
Cristian
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>