On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 3:34 AM, FT2 ft2.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
I cannot speak for other wikis, but with IP block exemption working out so well, we probably have no real need to keep tor open at all. The ability to defeat CheckUser is an admin right, permits easy socking, and requires a degree of communal trust. If there is a genuine need, then we have it in place, now, that the request will be considered communally and if agreed, granted. The strictness of the process has meant that this right can be given when genuinely helpful, without major concerns over abuse.
IP block exemption is fantastic for contributors who've been with us for a while, but what about new users? We can't really attract new contributors (perhaps from nondemocratic countries such as China, Burma, et cetera), if we insist that users are well-trusted before we let them edit through tor. This results in a catch-22 situation.
What does matter is the potential it has, for drawing attention to a user and encouraging speculative or bad faith conclusions (eg: "they use tor so they must be a sock/hiding something/up to no good/etc"). I'd be tempted to limit it primarily for the latter reason rather than for privacy reasons. In general it may not be a bad thing to let admins see that info in contribs, diffs and edit histories, as admins do a lot of the initial multiple account spotting for the project. Not making it public to all, and limiting it to admins, will cut most of the problematic usage.
I don't have a problem with implementing this now, but it would be a bit of a waste of time if somebody had to go through an IP block exemption process first anyway, since this would reveal that they're editing through tor, in itself.