2. Why not we let the wiki that do
Special:MergeAccount as homewiki?
Example,
Assuming that it has user test123@testwiki (1000 edit counts) and
test123@lowikibooks (500 edit counts)
* If test123 do merge account at,
http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MergeAccount, then testwiki
will be homewiki.
* If test123 do merge account at,
http://lo.wikibooks.org/wiki/Special:MergeAccount, then lowikibooks
will be homewiki.
We don't do this because it would defeat the purpose of having a home wiki.
The purpose of home wiki is to estimate the activeness?
Trying to do
http://lo.wikibooks.org/wiki/Special:MergeAccount by user
test123, is also the evidence that test123(a)lo.wikibooks is an active
account.
I think I now understand why using FCFS method to usurp global account
is not suitable with the current system.
Since, currently, the local account creation of the existing username
is not blocked,
FCFS will enable anyone to be able to usurp global account from
existing unmerged user.
However, could you please answer the following questions?
1. Is there a plan to prohibit local account creation of existing
ununified username?
2. While the selection is still depend on edit count, but why you not
collect the edit count of the subset sharing email or password, as
stated in
?
(``GROUP 2: If an account name exists in multiple subsets, the subset
with the highest edit count "wins".'')
While the edit count still be used for activeness measurement, I'm
please to write a patch for counting the subset's edit count, to make
the selection be more reasonable.
3. Why haven't you told me why sysop should take precedence in getting
global account?
On 5/30/08, Anon Sricharoenchai <anon.hui(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/30/08, Brion Vibber <brion(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
Anon Sricharoenchai wrote:
5. In another situation,
1. Mr.A own user123@frwikipedia: 50000 edits count
2. Mr.A has ever been approved to be sysop on frwikipedia, but at
that time, he refuse to be sysop
3. Mr.B own user123@lowikipedia: 10000 edits count
4. After SUL, user123 has not been merged by anyone
5. In someday later (after SUL), Mr.B has been elected to be sysop
on lowikipedia
6. At that time (after Mr.B got sysop), who will get the homewiki?
By default, it would go to Mr. B, as Mr. B has a privileged account
while Mr. A does not, and the heuristic gives preference to privileged
accounts if they exist.
If they choose to swap positions, that can be easily taken care of.
Why sysop should always take more precedence than user?
Mr.A may not want to be sysop, because he really want to have the same
equality as most other user.
Mr.A may believe and respect in equality of wikipedian, so he try to
be equal to others as much as possible.
6. The next situation,
1. Mr.A own user123@frwikipedia: 50000 edits count
2. Mr.A has ever been approved to be sysop on frwikipedia, but at
that time, he refuse to be sysop
3. Mr.B own user123@lowikipedia: 10000 edits count
4. When SUL is enabled for sysop only,
4.1 Mr.A try to merge his account, but he can't, since he is not sysop
4.2 Mr.B is sysop on lowikipedia, and Mr.B successfully merge
his user123 account (after Mr.A fail to merge)
5. When SUL is enabled for everyone, Mr.A try to merge his account
again, but he got the message "user123 has already been merged by
user123@lowikipedia"!!!
6. Can Mr.A request steward to delete global account of Mr.B?
Sure, he can ask. :)
However, after Mr.B is revoked global account, the home wiki is still
owned by Mr.B,
and only Mr.B can create global account again :(
Note that it would be rude for Mr. Steward to do so without the
agreement of Mr. B, who has legitimate claim to the account. But if they
What is legitimate?
Who can judge which one is legitimate?
Who can judge the sysop status and edit count is legitimate?
agree, or there is other very good reason to
switch the account
ownership, it can be easily taken care of.