I've been putting together a complaint to send to Tiscali about one of their subscribers breaching their TOS on wikipedia (may not work but worth a try). The problem is that the person caused most of the trouble they did while logged in. Thus checkuser is required to get hold of the IPs. Releasing these IPs would require foundation permission. Tiscali would also likely need to be able to contact the foundation to confirm any claims. I believe this gives us three options.
I send Tiscali the email without IPs and with the foundation's contact information. This is likely to archive nothing since Tiscali would have to contact the foundation before starting an investigation
The foundation gives me the IPs. This would allow Tiscali to begin an investigation but they would probably still have to contact the foundation. This has the disadvantage that the foundation has to release the IPs to me (even though I already know the range and Tiscali IPs don't tell you much I can understand the foundation not wanting to do this).
The foundation co opts my email and sends it itself. This allows it to keep the IP data private and removes possible barriers. On the other hand this could result in more work for the foundation.
I assume this situation will arise in future thus I am trying to start a general discussion as well as seeking answers for this specific case.
On Aug 3, 2006, at 7:39 PM, geni wrote:
I've been putting together a complaint to send to Tiscali about one of their subscribers breaching their TOS on wikipedia (may not work but worth a try). The problem is that the person caused most of the trouble they did while logged in. Thus checkuser is required to get hold of the IPs. Releasing these IPs would require foundation permission. Tiscali would also likely need to be able to contact the foundation to confirm any claims. I believe this gives us three options.
I send Tiscali the email without IPs and with the foundation's contact information. This is likely to archive nothing since Tiscali would have to contact the foundation before starting an investigation
The foundation gives me the IPs. This would allow Tiscali to begin an investigation but they would probably still have to contact the foundation. This has the disadvantage that the foundation has to release the IPs to me (even though I already know the range and Tiscali IPs don't tell you much I can understand the foundation not wanting to do this).
The foundation co opts my email and sends it itself. This allows it to keep the IP data private and removes possible barriers. On the other hand this could result in more work for the foundation.
I assume this situation will arise in future thus I am trying to start a general discussion as well as seeking answers for this specific case.
When the arbitration committee decided to try this we had obtained ips through checkuser so passed them along. That was, however, in the case of very bad actor. We were engaged in dialog after having blocked a major American university. There is a time limit, however someone that is really nasty will hang in there, blocked or not.
Fred
On 8/4/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
The foundation co opts my email and sends it itself. This allows it to keep the IP data private and removes possible barriers. On the other hand this could result in more work for the foundation.
Is there already a section within the foundation which can deal with this? If not is some form of "abuse reporting" procedure needed? I think the best way to do it is for the foundation itself to do the dirty work so to speak, which should avoid any privacy issues. Cheers, Nathan Carter (Cartman02au)
On 8/4/06, Nathan Carter cartmanau@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/4/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
The foundation co opts my email and sends it itself. This allows it to keep the IP data private and removes possible barriers. On the other hand this could result in more work for the foundation.
Is there already a section within the foundation which can deal with this? If not is some form of "abuse reporting" procedure needed? I think the best way to do it is for the foundation itself to do the dirty work so to speak, which should avoid any privacy issues. Cheers, Nathan Carter (Cartman02au)
On 8/4/06, Nathan Carter cartmanau@gmail.com wrote:
Is there already a section within the foundation which can deal with this? If not is some form of "abuse reporting" procedure needed? I think the best way to do it is for the foundation itself to do the dirty work so to speak, which should avoid any privacy issues. Cheers, Nathan Carter (Cartman02au)
While that may be an option in the short term in the long run this is likely to become more common and thus it is probably best that there to be a way to deal with this below foundation level.
geni wrote:
On 8/4/06, Nathan Carter cartmanau@gmail.com wrote:
Is there already a section within the foundation which can deal with this? If not is some form of "abuse reporting" procedure needed? I think the best way to do it is for the foundation itself to do the dirty work so to speak, which should avoid any privacy issues. Cheers, Nathan Carter (Cartman02au)
While that may be an option in the short term in the long run this is likely to become more common and thus it is probably best that there to be a way to deal with this below foundation level.
Most of the ISP's ignore these reports, including DCMA takedown notices (they just throw them in the trash). One very effective method that both works and gets their attention I have used at WikiGadugi dissuades 100% of vandals, gets the ISP's attention, and gets the problem fixed immediately. It is as follows:
1. When I first setup WikiGadugi, I had the distinct pleasure of being visited by WillyonWheels from the UK. 2. I tried the whole page move vandal, blocking, blah blah blah, it only made him more persistent. 3. I wrote a shim program into IP tables as a MediaWiki addon that does WHOIS lookup everytime the IP address gets used to write a page and saves not only the IP address for the write, but the ISP range as well. 4. The shim checks a file not visible where I record IP addresses for vandal addresses and autoblocks the entire ISP IP range AT THE FIREWALL blocking both reading and writing, shutting down all access for that ISP.
I had someone from the UK email me (my email servers are on a separate network) from this ISP range. It was blueyonder.uk and apparently, other universities were studying the Cherokee translation and wondered why the site was down. It was not long before the ISP notified me a certain account was "suspended".
I would suggest creating a banned ISP listing with ranges based on persistent vandals, and when they suspend the accounts, you will unblock them at the firewall. It fixed my vandalism problems. I have 0% vandalism at the WikiGadugi site and I stuck it to WillyOnWheels.
Jeff
Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
geni wrote:
On 8/4/06, Nathan Carter cartmanau@gmail.com wrote:
Is there already a section within the foundation which can deal with this? If not is some form of "abuse reporting" procedure needed? I think the best way to do it is for the foundation itself to do the dirty work so to speak, which should avoid any privacy issues. Cheers, Nathan Carter (Cartman02au)
While that may be an option in the short term in the long run this is likely to become more common and thus it is probably best that there to be a way to deal with this below foundation level.
Most of the ISP's ignore these reports, including DCMA takedown notices (they just throw them in the trash). One very effective method that both works and gets their attention I have used at WikiGadugi dissuades 100% of vandals, gets the ISP's attention, and gets the problem fixed immediately. It is as follows:
- When I first setup WikiGadugi, I had the distinct pleasure of being
visited by WillyonWheels from the UK. 2. I tried the whole page move vandal, blocking, blah blah blah, it only made him more persistent. 3. I wrote a shim program into IP tables as a MediaWiki addon that does WHOIS lookup everytime the IP address gets used to write a page and saves not only the IP address for the write, but the ISP range as well. 4. The shim checks a file not visible where I record IP addresses for vandal addresses and autoblocks the entire ISP IP range AT THE FIREWALL blocking both reading and writing, shutting down all access for that ISP.
I had someone from the UK email me (my email servers are on a separate network) from this ISP range. It was blueyonder.uk and apparently, other universities were studying the Cherokee translation and wondered why the site was down. It was not long before the ISP notified me a certain account was "suspended".
I would suggest creating a banned ISP listing with ranges based on persistent vandals, and when they suspend the accounts, you will unblock them at the firewall. It fixed my vandalism problems. I have 0% vandalism at the WikiGadugi site and I stuck it to WillyOnWheels.
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
BTW, Wow is an active Wikipedia user and a member of the Linux Community.
Jeff
On Aug 4, 2006, at 7:39 AM, Nathan Carter wrote:
On 8/4/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
The foundation co opts my email and sends it itself. This allows it to keep the IP data private and removes possible barriers. On the other hand this could result in more work for the foundation.
Is there already a section within the foundation which can deal with this? If not is some form of "abuse reporting" procedure needed? I think the best way to do it is for the foundation itself to do the dirty work so to speak, which should avoid any privacy issues. Cheers, Nathan Carter (Cartman02au)
Assuming this is an English Wikipedia thing, this could become an arbitration committee matter.
Fred
On 8/4/06, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
Assuming this is an English Wikipedia thing, this could become an arbitration committee matter.
Fred
So arbcom should handle complaints to ISPs? Should I forward the email to you?
On Aug 4, 2006, at 10:19 AM, geni wrote:
On 8/4/06, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
Assuming this is an English Wikipedia thing, this could become an arbitration committee matter.
Fred
So arbcom should handle complaints to ISPs? Should I forward the email to you?
-- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
We might be able to once we know what is going on. Yes, I will introduce the matter to the arbcom.
Fred
Fred Bauder wrote:
On Aug 4, 2006, at 10:03 AM, Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
BTW, Wow is an active Wikipedia user and a member of the Linux Community.
Jeff
May not be the same guy. I think our WOW is in Canada.
Fred
Fred,
I considered this and the possibly this username is a public moniker folks use due to the notability to vandlize other wiki's. Whomever it is appears to have automated software to perform their edits as the page moves occur in batches and are must faster than can be done by a human being.
Jeff
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Oooh! War of attrition!
James approves.
On 8/4/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
geni wrote:
On 8/4/06, Nathan Carter cartmanau@gmail.com wrote:
Is there already a section within the foundation which can deal with
this?
If not is some form of "abuse reporting" procedure needed? I think the best way to do it is for the foundation itself to do the
dirty
work so to speak, which should avoid any privacy issues. Cheers, Nathan Carter (Cartman02au)
While that may be an option in the short term in the long run this is likely to become more common and thus it is probably best that there to be a way to deal with this below foundation level.
Most of the ISP's ignore these reports, including DCMA takedown notices (they just throw them in the trash). One very effective method that both works and gets their attention I have used at WikiGadugi dissuades 100% of vandals, gets the ISP's attention, and gets the problem fixed immediately. It is as follows:
- When I first setup WikiGadugi, I had the distinct pleasure of being
visited by WillyonWheels from the UK. 2. I tried the whole page move vandal, blocking, blah blah blah, it only made him more persistent. 3. I wrote a shim program into IP tables as a MediaWiki addon that does WHOIS lookup everytime the IP address gets used to write a page and saves not only the IP address for the write, but the ISP range as well. 4. The shim checks a file not visible where I record IP addresses for vandal addresses and autoblocks the entire ISP IP range AT THE FIREWALL blocking both reading and writing, shutting down all access for that ISP.
I had someone from the UK email me (my email servers are on a separate network) from this ISP range. It was blueyonder.uk and apparently, other universities were studying the Cherokee translation and wondered why the site was down. It was not long before the ISP notified me a certain account was "suspended".
I would suggest creating a banned ISP listing with ranges based on persistent vandals, and when they suspend the accounts, you will unblock them at the firewall. It fixed my vandalism problems. I have 0% vandalism at the WikiGadugi site and I stuck it to WillyOnWheels.
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Jeff Merkey -- defender of American Indians, defeater of Asian ISPs.
Wikipedia could technically set up such an extreme system, but it would cause too many people to be blocked at once, and thus less people can edit (Jimmy-Jimmy seems to like allowing everyone to edit). Also, such high levels of blocking could give us a bad name.
But I'd implement it.
On 8/4/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
James Hare wrote:
Oooh! War of attrition!
James approves.
I had to do the same thing to chinanet and several other asian ISPs as well -- they remain blocked -- permanently.
Jeff
On 8/4/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
geni wrote:
On 8/4/06, Nathan Carter cartmanau@gmail.com wrote:
Is there already a section within the foundation which can deal with
this?
If not is some form of "abuse reporting" procedure needed? I think the best way to do it is for the foundation itself to do the
dirty
work so to speak, which should avoid any privacy issues. Cheers, Nathan Carter (Cartman02au)
While that may be an option in the short term in the long run this is likely to become more common and thus it is probably best that there to be a way to deal with this below foundation level.
Most of the ISP's ignore these reports, including DCMA takedown notices (they just throw them in the trash). One very effective method that both works and gets their attention I have used at WikiGadugi dissuades 100% of vandals, gets the ISP's attention, and gets the problem fixed immediately. It is as follows:
- When I first setup WikiGadugi, I had the distinct pleasure of being
visited by WillyonWheels from the UK. 2. I tried the whole page move vandal, blocking, blah blah blah, it only made him more persistent. 3. I wrote a shim program into IP tables as a MediaWiki addon that does WHOIS lookup everytime the IP address gets used to write a page and saves not only the IP address for the write, but the ISP range as well. 4. The shim checks a file not visible where I record IP addresses for vandal addresses and autoblocks the entire ISP IP range AT THE FIREWALL blocking both reading and writing, shutting down all access for that
ISP.
I had someone from the UK email me (my email servers are on a separate network) from this ISP range. It was blueyonder.uk and apparently, other universities were studying the Cherokee translation and wondered why the site was down. It was not long before the ISP notified me a certain account was "suspended".
I would suggest creating a banned ISP listing with ranges based on persistent vandals, and when they suspend the accounts, you will unblock them at the firewall. It fixed my vandalism problems. I have 0% vandalism at the WikiGadugi site and I stuck it to WillyOnWheels.
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Yes... stating on a page "VERIZON IS BANNED!" for example would definitely make them scared and start taking actions against jerks.
Developers, are you listening? Jeff's got it right!
On 8/4/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
James Hare wrote:
Jeff Merkey -- defender of American Indians, defeater of Asian ISPs.
Wikipedia could technically set up such an extreme system, but it would cause too many people to be blocked at once, and thus less people can
edit
(Jimmy-Jimmy seems to like allowing everyone to edit). Also, such high levels of blocking could give us a bad name.
But I'd implement it.
Well, the only way to get an ISPs attention is to it them in their pocketbooks. If their users cannot use the site and are "BANNED" on a public list -- you can very well bet they will jump to start swatting these gadfly vandals and pretty quick.
Jeff
On 8/4/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
James Hare wrote:
Oooh! War of attrition!
James approves.
I had to do the same thing to chinanet and several other asian ISPs as well -- they remain blocked -- permanently.
Jeff
On 8/4/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
geni wrote:
On 8/4/06, Nathan Carter cartmanau@gmail.com wrote:
>Is there already a section within the foundation which can deal with > > > >
this?
>If not is some form of "abuse reporting" procedure needed? >I think the best way to do it is for the foundation itself to do the > > > >
dirty
>work so to speak, which should avoid any privacy issues. >Cheers, >Nathan Carter (Cartman02au) > > > > > > While that may be an option in the short term in the long run this is likely to become more common and thus it is probably best that there to be a way to deal with this below foundation level.
Most of the ISP's ignore these reports, including DCMA takedown
notices
(they just throw them in the trash). One very effective method that both works and gets their attention I have used at WikiGadugi dissuades 100% of vandals, gets the ISP's attention, and gets the problem fixed immediately. It is as follows:
- When I first setup WikiGadugi, I had the distinct pleasure of being
visited by WillyonWheels from the UK. 2. I tried the whole page move vandal, blocking, blah blah blah, it
only
made him more persistent. 3. I wrote a shim program into IP tables as a MediaWiki addon that
does
WHOIS lookup everytime the IP address gets used to write a page and saves not only the IP address for the write, but the ISP range as well. 4. The shim checks a file not visible where I record IP addresses for vandal addresses and autoblocks the entire ISP IP range AT THE
FIREWALL
blocking both reading and writing, shutting down all access for that
ISP.
I had someone from the UK email me (my email servers are on a separate network) from this ISP range. It was blueyonder.uk and apparently, other universities were studying the Cherokee translation and wondered why the site was down. It was not
long
before the ISP notified me a certain account was "suspended".
I would suggest creating a banned ISP listing with ranges based on persistent vandals, and when they suspend the accounts, you will
unblock
them at the firewall. It fixed my vandalism problems. I have 0% vandalism
at
the WikiGadugi site and I stuck it to WillyOnWheels.
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
James Hare wrote:
Oooh! War of attrition!
James approves.
I had to do the same thing to chinanet and several other asian ISPs as well -- they remain blocked -- permanently.
Jeff
On 8/4/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
geni wrote:
On 8/4/06, Nathan Carter cartmanau@gmail.com wrote:
Is there already a section within the foundation which can deal with
this?
If not is some form of "abuse reporting" procedure needed? I think the best way to do it is for the foundation itself to do the
dirty
work so to speak, which should avoid any privacy issues. Cheers, Nathan Carter (Cartman02au)
While that may be an option in the short term in the long run this is likely to become more common and thus it is probably best that there to be a way to deal with this below foundation level.
Most of the ISP's ignore these reports, including DCMA takedown notices (they just throw them in the trash). One very effective method that both works and gets their attention I have used at WikiGadugi dissuades 100% of vandals, gets the ISP's attention, and gets the problem fixed immediately. It is as follows:
- When I first setup WikiGadugi, I had the distinct pleasure of being
visited by WillyonWheels from the UK. 2. I tried the whole page move vandal, blocking, blah blah blah, it only made him more persistent. 3. I wrote a shim program into IP tables as a MediaWiki addon that does WHOIS lookup everytime the IP address gets used to write a page and saves not only the IP address for the write, but the ISP range as well. 4. The shim checks a file not visible where I record IP addresses for vandal addresses and autoblocks the entire ISP IP range AT THE FIREWALL blocking both reading and writing, shutting down all access for that ISP.
I had someone from the UK email me (my email servers are on a separate network) from this ISP range. It was blueyonder.uk and apparently, other universities were studying the Cherokee translation and wondered why the site was down. It was not long before the ISP notified me a certain account was "suspended".
I would suggest creating a banned ISP listing with ranges based on persistent vandals, and when they suspend the accounts, you will unblock them at the firewall. It fixed my vandalism problems. I have 0% vandalism at the WikiGadugi site and I stuck it to WillyOnWheels.
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
James Hare wrote:
Oooh! War of attrition!
James approves.
One other thing I have done is create two server arrays -- one external WikiGadugi network, and an internal one. The reason "recent changes" (ᎾᏞᎬ ᏗᎦᏁᏟᏴᏍᏗ) never shows activity and the site undergoes database purges and updates is the actual community server is behind a proxy -- people have to be given access. I take the translated XML dumps which are redumped from the actual community server and importDump them into the external server for public viewing. I did this for two reasons.
1. Vandals get smashed and their bogus junk gets blasted out of the database every two weeks. 2. My community has privacy of their editing history to the General Public (but not to each other).
Most of the content on Wikipedia talk pages that gets scraped by Google really does not belong in the public view, or anywhere else public. It's public to my community, not to the outside world.
Jeff
On 8/4/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
geni wrote:
On 8/4/06, Nathan Carter cartmanau@gmail.com wrote:
Is there already a section within the foundation which can deal with
this?
If not is some form of "abuse reporting" procedure needed? I think the best way to do it is for the foundation itself to do the
dirty
work so to speak, which should avoid any privacy issues. Cheers, Nathan Carter (Cartman02au)
While that may be an option in the short term in the long run this is likely to become more common and thus it is probably best that there to be a way to deal with this below foundation level.
Most of the ISP's ignore these reports, including DCMA takedown notices (they just throw them in the trash). One very effective method that both works and gets their attention I have used at WikiGadugi dissuades 100% of vandals, gets the ISP's attention, and gets the problem fixed immediately. It is as follows:
- When I first setup WikiGadugi, I had the distinct pleasure of being
visited by WillyonWheels from the UK. 2. I tried the whole page move vandal, blocking, blah blah blah, it only made him more persistent. 3. I wrote a shim program into IP tables as a MediaWiki addon that does WHOIS lookup everytime the IP address gets used to write a page and saves not only the IP address for the write, but the ISP range as well. 4. The shim checks a file not visible where I record IP addresses for vandal addresses and autoblocks the entire ISP IP range AT THE FIREWALL blocking both reading and writing, shutting down all access for that ISP.
I had someone from the UK email me (my email servers are on a separate network) from this ISP range. It was blueyonder.uk and apparently, other universities were studying the Cherokee translation and wondered why the site was down. It was not long before the ISP notified me a certain account was "suspended".
I would suggest creating a banned ISP listing with ranges based on persistent vandals, and when they suspend the accounts, you will unblock them at the firewall. It fixed my vandalism problems. I have 0% vandalism at the WikiGadugi site and I stuck it to WillyOnWheels.
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
James Hare wrote:
Jeff Merkey -- defender of American Indians, defeater of Asian ISPs.
Wikipedia could technically set up such an extreme system, but it would cause too many people to be blocked at once, and thus less people can edit (Jimmy-Jimmy seems to like allowing everyone to edit). Also, such high levels of blocking could give us a bad name.
But I'd implement it.
Well, the only way to get an ISPs attention is to it them in their pocketbooks. If their users cannot use the site and are "BANNED" on a public list -- you can very well bet they will jump to start swatting these gadfly vandals and pretty quick.
Jeff
On 8/4/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
James Hare wrote:
Oooh! War of attrition!
James approves.
I had to do the same thing to chinanet and several other asian ISPs as well -- they remain blocked -- permanently.
Jeff
On 8/4/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
geni wrote:
On 8/4/06, Nathan Carter cartmanau@gmail.com wrote:
Is there already a section within the foundation which can deal with
this?
If not is some form of "abuse reporting" procedure needed? I think the best way to do it is for the foundation itself to do the
dirty
work so to speak, which should avoid any privacy issues. Cheers, Nathan Carter (Cartman02au)
While that may be an option in the short term in the long run this is likely to become more common and thus it is probably best that there to be a way to deal with this below foundation level.
Most of the ISP's ignore these reports, including DCMA takedown notices (they just throw them in the trash). One very effective method that both works and gets their attention I have used at WikiGadugi dissuades 100% of vandals, gets the ISP's attention, and gets the problem fixed immediately. It is as follows:
- When I first setup WikiGadugi, I had the distinct pleasure of being
visited by WillyonWheels from the UK. 2. I tried the whole page move vandal, blocking, blah blah blah, it only made him more persistent. 3. I wrote a shim program into IP tables as a MediaWiki addon that does WHOIS lookup everytime the IP address gets used to write a page and saves not only the IP address for the write, but the ISP range as well. 4. The shim checks a file not visible where I record IP addresses for vandal addresses and autoblocks the entire ISP IP range AT THE FIREWALL blocking both reading and writing, shutting down all access for that
ISP.
I had someone from the UK email me (my email servers are on a separate network) from this ISP range. It was blueyonder.uk and apparently, other universities were studying the Cherokee translation and wondered why the site was down. It was not long before the ISP notified me a certain account was "suspended".
I would suggest creating a banned ISP listing with ranges based on persistent vandals, and when they suspend the accounts, you will unblock them at the firewall. It fixed my vandalism problems. I have 0% vandalism at the WikiGadugi site and I stuck it to WillyOnWheels.
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
James Hare wrote:
Jeff Merkey -- defender of American Indians, defeater of Asian ISPs.
Wikipedia could technically set up such an extreme system, but it would cause too many people to be blocked at once, and thus less people can edit (Jimmy-Jimmy seems to like allowing everyone to edit). Also, such high levels of blocking could give us a bad name.
But I'd implement it.
I'll post the extension code at wikimedia.org. I am working on shipment of several Wikipedia appliances to one of our first customers and some solera shipment this afternoon :-) :-) :-)
I'll cleanup the code this evening and get it posted over the weekend.
:-)
Jeff
On 8/4/06, Jeff V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
James Hare wrote:
Oooh! War of attrition!
James approves.
I had to do the same thing to chinanet and several other asian ISPs as well -- they remain blocked -- permanently.
Jeff
On 8/4/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey jmerkey@wolfmountaingroup.com wrote:
geni wrote:
On 8/4/06, Nathan Carter cartmanau@gmail.com wrote:
Is there already a section within the foundation which can deal with
this?
If not is some form of "abuse reporting" procedure needed? I think the best way to do it is for the foundation itself to do the
dirty
work so to speak, which should avoid any privacy issues. Cheers, Nathan Carter (Cartman02au)
While that may be an option in the short term in the long run this is likely to become more common and thus it is probably best that there to be a way to deal with this below foundation level.
Most of the ISP's ignore these reports, including DCMA takedown notices (they just throw them in the trash). One very effective method that both works and gets their attention I have used at WikiGadugi dissuades 100% of vandals, gets the ISP's attention, and gets the problem fixed immediately. It is as follows:
- When I first setup WikiGadugi, I had the distinct pleasure of being
visited by WillyonWheels from the UK. 2. I tried the whole page move vandal, blocking, blah blah blah, it only made him more persistent. 3. I wrote a shim program into IP tables as a MediaWiki addon that does WHOIS lookup everytime the IP address gets used to write a page and saves not only the IP address for the write, but the ISP range as well. 4. The shim checks a file not visible where I record IP addresses for vandal addresses and autoblocks the entire ISP IP range AT THE FIREWALL blocking both reading and writing, shutting down all access for that
ISP.
I had someone from the UK email me (my email servers are on a separate network) from this ISP range. It was blueyonder.uk and apparently, other universities were studying the Cherokee translation and wondered why the site was down. It was not long before the ISP notified me a certain account was "suspended".
I would suggest creating a banned ISP listing with ranges based on persistent vandals, and when they suspend the accounts, you will unblock them at the firewall. It fixed my vandalism problems. I have 0% vandalism at the WikiGadugi site and I stuck it to WillyOnWheels.
Jeff _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I would suggest creating a banned ISP listing with ranges based on persistent vandals, and when they suspend the accounts, you will unblock them at the firewall. It fixed my vandalism problems. I have 0% vandalism at the WikiGadugi site and I stuck it to WillyOnWheels.
Jeff
Jeff, you shoulda made this a board election issue - you could probably have gotten a ton of votes from all the good editors the vandals are slowly driving off.
On 8/4/06, Jack jackdt@gmail.com wrote:
Jeff, you shoulda made this a board election issue - you could probably have gotten a ton of votes from all the good editors the vandals are slowly driving off. -- Jeandré
However all the votes from the people who use NTL, Tiscali, AOL, earthlink, whatever would rather counterbalance that
Jack wrote:
I would suggest creating a banned ISP listing with ranges based on persistent vandals, and when they suspend the accounts, you will unblock them at the firewall. It fixed my vandalism problems. I have 0% vandalism at the WikiGadugi site and I stuck it to WillyOnWheels.
Jeff
Jeff, you shoulda made this a board election issue - you could probably have gotten a ton of votes from all the good editors the vandals are slowly driving off.
I think the other candidates can certainly use the same platform if they wish and I'll throw the code over the wall to the Foundation.
I decided not to run for the position because,
A) I don't have time to travel all over the place at my own expense and run three companies too, plus WikiGadugi. B) There are some folks in the community who would make a public stink and Jimbo's life mierable were I to be elected/appointed, and fracture and polarize the community (not that big a concern but not a good starting point). C) The Bylaws setup a 3-2 voting structure where the other board members are always going to get overruled on any vote that is not 5-0. D) The B&O Insurance won't cover any claims for the foundation board of trustees and I would have to get a policy from a group that handles non-profits like the foundation. E) I have too many irons in the fire as it is, and the WikiGadugi project and my other interests will suffer. F) I am an excellent public speaker and look good in a suit, but a really good PR person is what's needed to be successful in this role who is young and vibrant to give it an excellent public image, not an old Cherokee Indian Grandfather.
:-)
Jeff
Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
Jack wrote:
I would suggest creating a banned ISP listing with ranges based on persistent vandals, and when they suspend the accounts, you will unblock them at the firewall. It fixed my vandalism problems. I have 0% vandalism at the WikiGadugi site and I stuck it to WillyOnWheels.
Jeff
Jeff, you shoulda made this a board election issue - you could probably have gotten a ton of votes from all the good editors the vandals are slowly driving off.
I think the other candidates can certainly use the same platform if they wish and I'll throw the code over the wall to the Foundation.
I decided not to run for the position because,
A) I don't have time to travel all over the place at my own expense and run three companies too, plus WikiGadugi. B) There are some folks in the community who would make a public stink and Jimbo's life mierable were I to be elected/appointed, and fracture and polarize the community (not that big a concern but not a good starting point). C) The Bylaws setup a 3-2 voting structure where the other board members are always going to get overruled on any vote that is not 5-0. D) The B&O Insurance won't cover any claims for the foundation board of trustees and I would have to get a policy from a group that handles non-profits like the foundation. E) I have too many irons in the fire as it is, and the WikiGadugi project and my other interests will suffer. F) I am an excellent public speaker and look good in a suit, but a really good PR person is what's needed to be successful in this role who is young and vibrant to give it an excellent public image, not an old Cherokee Indian Grandfather.
:-)
Jeff
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
If they wanted me to do something like "project coordinator Native American Languages Program", I would do that and travel around and visit the tribes and promote Wikipedia and that would be something that would dovetail nicely, I do not think I can or should be on their Board. I sit on too many Boards already and when you are on more than three, your B&O insurance goes through the roof ....
Jeff
James Hare wrote:
Yes... stating on a page "VERIZON IS BANNED!" for example would definitely make them scared and start taking actions against jerks.
Oh, really? Have you tried? Are you speaking from experience?
Surprisingly, I've never been unable to edit due to my IP being blocked (for someone else's wrongdoing). So no, I'm not speaking from experience.
On 8/5/06, Lars Aronsson lars@aronsson.se wrote:
James Hare wrote:
Yes... stating on a page "VERIZON IS BANNED!" for example would
definitely
make them scared and start taking actions against jerks.
Oh, really? Have you tried? Are you speaking from experience?
-- Lars Aronsson (lars@aronsson.se) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Aug 5, 2006, at 3:18 AM, Lars Aronsson wrote:
James Hare wrote:
Yes... stating on a page "VERIZON IS BANNED!" for example would definitely make them scared and start taking actions against jerks.
Oh, really? Have you tried? Are you speaking from experience?
Better to try first to enlist them on our side. We might be able to force the issue, but it is an unpleasant and possibly ineffective way to go.
Fred
On 8/7/06, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
On Aug 5, 2006, at 3:18 AM, Lars Aronsson wrote:
James Hare wrote:
Yes... stating on a page "VERIZON IS BANNED!" for example would definitely make them scared and start taking actions against jerks.
Oh, really? Have you tried? Are you speaking from experience?
Better to try first to enlist them on our side. We might be able to force the issue, but it is an unpleasant and possibly ineffective way to go.
Fred
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
This should only happen as a last resort. It is difficult for me to edit from work as most of the IPs of our rolling cache are blocked. It is so frustrating it isnt funny. I dont think alienating valid users is the way to go.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org