Sorry I failed to send this to the list the first time
--- Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 10:20:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb(a)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimedia-wide
global blocking mechanism?
To: effeietsanders(a)gmail.com
I will grant you that it easier in the short-term to
not use an opt-in system. However I strongly
disagree
that in practice the results would be the same as
requiring opt-in. Even the most wonderful idea can
have disastrous results because of poor
communications. I can agree with the principles of
this idea, but I also also think that such changes
in
principle require comprehensible notification. If
you
are not willing to bother with the
communication(either through annoucements or using
opt-in), you are setting yourselves up for failure.
Personally I think opt-in is more workable than
blanket notifications in local languages. Using an
opt-in system will mean it will take some time for
the
system to reach full effect. But you should still
get
the feature you desire, and I believe you will save
yourselves a great deal of difficulty in the long
run.
Frankly I am surprised your argument against opt-in
is
that it would be easier for the stewards to do
otherwise. If someone does not wish to bother
communicating with small wikis and wikis which have
trouble with English, I wonder why they ever thought
to become a steward.
Birgitte SB
--- effe iets anders <effeietsanders(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
no or barely a community. Most of the wiki's
are
small sized, and many
show little activity. It is much easier, and would
in practice be
almost the same, to just automatically opt in
projects...
BR, Lodewijk
2008/2/1, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb(a)yahoo.com>om>:
> The problem with opt-out is that a wiki must
know
this
> even *exists* in order to opt-out. So if you
are
> capable of notifing all the village pumps in
a
> language they can comprehend, this is
reasonable.
If
> you are not capable of that, opt-out is not
> reasonable. If this is mainly for wiki's with
no
community, then allow stewards to "opt-in" such
wiki's. If they have no community, they will not
object.
Birgitte SB
--- effe iets anders <effeietsanders(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I agree with your concerns. However, currently
a
> > similar system is
> > already active, proxyblocker. This system
blocks
> > some (I dont know how
> > many) proxies, detected somewhere in 2005.
Dont
>
worry, no new blocks
> are being added, but some are still in place.
The
> user just gets a
> message that he is blocked by proxyblocker. We
could
> > pick a logical
> > name to appear in the message, that would
point
to
> meta. Maybe
> CrosswikiBlocker, or VandalbotBlocker or
something.
> >
> > Opt-in is not workable. This new thing is
mainly
for
> wiki's with no
> community. You can only opt in if you have a
> community. Hence, opt in
> would not work. After all, the stewards mainly
have
> to block bots on
> wiki's with no or almost no normal edits. when
there
> are people
> around, and they have sysops and a community,
they
> > can handle it
> > themselves generally. However, I would plea
for
>
opt-out.
>
> For the unblocking, I do not think that should
be a
> major issue, if we
> would choose for a maximum of a block in the
range
> of 1 day-1week. In
> that case, the chance that someone is affected
by
> that block, but is
> not the person who was doing the malicious
edits, is
> > quite slim.
> > Furthermore, that person will survive to wait
a
day
> or a week, no big
> harm done. If it proofs to be a major blocker
for a
> > specific
> > community, ie they would only have one IP for
a
> > whole country or
> > something, they could opt out.
> >
> > BR, Eia
> >
> > 2008/1/31, Birgitte SB
<birgitte_sb(a)yahoo.com>om>:
>
>
> > --- Andrew Gray <shimgray(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 31/01/2008, Birgitte SB
> <birgitte_sb(a)yahoo.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > This is the key problem. I think that
unless
> > we
> > > > are
> > > > > capable of notifing all wikis of about
the
> >
> workings of
> > > > this process in a language they are
proficient
> > > > taking
> > > > > blocks Wikimedia wide will cause a lot
of
>
harm.
> > > Of
> > > > course an opt-in system would be very
> workable.
> > >
> > > Would logging it in the local block-log
system
> > be an
> > > > acceptable method
> > > > of notification?
> > >
> > > I was more thinking first about a
notification
>
that
> > this ability even *exists* before addressing
> > notification individual blocks. However
regarding
> > individual blocks what language are you
proposing
> > the
> > > local log entry be written in?
> > >
> > > The only reasonable way to do this is to
have
the
> log
> > entries be a consistent pre-arranged formula
that
> > > links to a local page explaining the system
in
the
> > local language. The best way to ensure
that
all
> this
> > is set-up is to use an opt-in system that
requires
> > > these things be set-up before blocks .
> > >
> > > Anything else means some wiki(s) will wake
up
one
> day
> > to realize there are inexplicable blocks in
place.
> > Likely with logs entries they cannot
read.
And
> > very
> > > likely when they start making inquiries no
one
> > will be
> > > able to explain what has happened to them
own
> > language
> > > leading to further misunderstandings.
> > >
> > > Seriously make a system to handle these
blocks
and
> > > require every wiki wishing to join the
system
file
> > a
> > > bug and things will go much more smoothly.
If
the
> > stewards find they are doing tedious
manual
blocks
> on
> > a certain wiki, they can encourage the that
wiki
to
> file the bug.
>
> Birgitte SB
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
> >
> >
_______________________________________________
>
foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe:
> >
>
> >
> >
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.