Brion Vibber a écrit:
I was initially skeptical but after seeing it in
action I'm quite taken
with it; it greatly reduces the annoyance factor of a flood vandal with
relatively little effort. That the vandalism is still in the edit
histories is not that big a deal compared to the potential for abuse of
an unrecoverable rollback that actually disappeared the edits.
It could use some refinement; making this the default behavior for
rollback, making the 'show hidden edits' in RC easier to use and more
prominent, perhaps a count of the number of hidden edits if any; and
some way of noting the gravity of rollback (ie, that it should _not_ be
used for reverting a change you just don't like, but is meant only for
base vandalism, particularly massive flood vandalism).
Separately: setting up sysops and marking accounts as official bots and
such certainly is something that shouldn't be a bottleneck on the
developers. Feel free to make some suggestions (or write the code :) for
a less centralized setup.
Actually, the main default I might see to it, is that we loose
perspective of the level of the vandalism still ongoing. Some users
sometimes say "he, we won, he left Wikipedia in the end". To which we
have to answer, that no, actually, he was just there 2 hours later.
There is not even a need to block the ip if he is already gone, because
he never comes back under the same ip. So, if one does not block the ip,
as soon as the stuff is reverted, everything that happened is invisible.
Even if we do block the ip, it is unblocked very quickly. So
practically, there is little way we can track what happened.
To a certain extent, I find it a little bit troubling, as it may be seen
as an unfair and hidden process, especially from the newbie perspective.
but well...