LDC wrote on sourceforge:
After having my user: page vandalized repeatedly today, I'm convinced that user pages should only be editable by the logged on user. Furthor, there should be a submit form to submit IP addresses of users who abuse the system. Perhaps with a "1 hour suspension" which takes effect immediately so that an admin has time to investigate and take permanant action.
I'm ambivalent about whether or not user: should only be editable by logged-in users and would oppose this only if it were difficult to implement or could break anything (there are /far/ more important things to do). But really, this is kinda anti-wiki, no? As it is me thinks too many pages are not editable by too many people. I know, I know, this is done for practical reasons but I suggest we re-implement something like "trusted user"status on a 30 day/30 edit (or whatever) basis so that 'old hands' could edit protected pages, move articles and their histories and do any other non-meta sysop functions.
I see no need to block users like Zoe or Jheijmans or Enchanter etc. from editing the Main Page, copyediting and condensing policy pages (which is /badly/ needed for some of them BTW) or administratively moving articles. These users and many others have more than enough experience with our policies, naming conventions and such to be trusted to do semi-sensitive work like that. Heck, Zoe and Jheijmans already meet the requirements for being sysops; they are trusted members of the community, and they contribute to policy discussion (although trusted, I don't remember Enchanter contributing to this list on a regular basis -- I may be wrong...).
However, we should be careful to not have many scores of sysop accounts -- there simply would be too much potential for random internet thugs coming in and guessing some ancient, no longer contributing sysop's password and really doing some harm. BTW, the contributor status of sysops should be checked once in a while anyway and those that have not contributed in some time (more than x months) should be non-punitively demoted to user and a note placed on their page telling them to ask another sysop or better yet the list to re-promote them after/if they return.
Furthermore, non logged-in users contribute a hell of a lot to the project and I don't fault them for being anonymous (its their /right/). Why single them out by allowing /any/ logged-in user the ability to block them for any period of time (even totally green users that set-up their accounts 5 minutes before)? I forsee much abuse with that feature. In addition, I constantly read comments on talk pages of logged-in users chiding non-logged-in users to "sign-up" in a tone that implies that it is some type of sin not to be signed-up!
Yes I am probably guilty of this too but only with those that were majorly annoying me and chatting a lot on talk pages (hopefully this is all in my past now). BTW, please correct me whenever I am being too harsh on the 'pedia.
I reserve that right here though :->
--mav