Le Monday 23 May 2005 13:24, Anthere a écrit :
Yann Forget a écrit:
Hi,
Le Sunday 22 May 2005 17:05, Magnus Manske a écrit :
David Gerard schrieb:
I suggest that we allow ratings by anonymous users (IP numbers), at
least in 1.5.
Reasons for this:
- we've always worked by leaving things as open as possible and only
restricting as needed;
- we're explicitly not using the data for anything important yet, so if
ten thousand rating spammers put [[Image:Autofellatio.jpg]] top
marks for
everything, it won't actually affect anything;
- the raw data will be of great interest to people, and as wide as
possible is good. (I can see the academics studying Wikipedia slavering for the ratings data tarball ;-)
Two reasons against this:
- Later, we will allow only logged-in users to rate articles, right?
Otherwise, we'll lose a great part of the perceived reliability improvement, IMHO. But how can we really set up this system if the data we use as a foundation for the decision is based on anon entries as well?
I think it better if only logged in users can validate articles. But well it depend what we want to do with this feature: selecting articles for an offline publication or studying psychology and sociology of Wikipedia readers ? We have a precedent: only logged in users can upload images.
This is not the same. Uploading images is a way to improve the quality of the project. We had to put restrictions to limit vandalism.
For me this is the same. Validating articles is a way to improve the quality of the project.
However, I think we need feedback from readers as well. Possibly a way to go around of vandalism would be to allow voting with a valid email address on top ?
Which is stricter than creating an account and logging in, as we don't require a valid email for that.
Ant
Yann