Block message - Wikitech-l - lists.wikimedia.org

List overview All Threads
Download

Block message

Redirect to section

MediaWiki automated test run...

George Herbert

5 Dec 2006 5 Dec '06

8:45 p.m.

I haven't dived the code, but when did fortnights become part of the block length display code? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&pa… As amusing as I find that, it seems like a bad UI design choice... -- -george william herbert george.herbert(a)gmail.com

Reply

Show replies by date

Michael Bimmler

5 Dec 5 Dec

8:58 p.m.

If it was just something like "was blocked for 1 fortnight or 2 fortnights", one could start to argue about it. But "8.625 fortnights"? Please... Michael On 12/5/06, George Herbert <george.herbert(a)gmail.com> wrote:

I haven't dived the code, but when did fortnights become part of the block length display code? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&pa… As amusing as I find that, it seems like a bad UI design choice... -- -george william herbert george.herbert(a)gmail.com _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply

David Gerard

9:35 p.m.

On 05/12/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler(a)gmail.com> wrote:

If it was just something like "was blocked for 1 fortnight or 2 fortnights", one could start to argue about it. But "8.625 fortnights"? Please...

It's one of the GNU tar time units, and the blocking admin need not set whole numbers as the quantity ;-) - d.

Reply

Steve Bennett

6 Dec 6 Dec

5:28 a.m.

On 12/6/06, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:

It's one of the GNU tar time units, and the blocking admin need not set whole numbers as the quantity ;-)

Yeah, looks like that's how that particular admin gets his kicks ... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&… Steve

Reply

Rob Church

8 a.m.

On 06/12/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&…

I would *suggest* encouraging administrators to use whole "units" of time when issuing blocks. No technical reason for this, but that block log looks random and on first glance, suggests that someone's taking blocking to be a bit of a joke. Since those blocks *sound* legit to me, we obviously wouldn't want anybody getting the wrong idea about the user... ...using sane block units also makes it easier for other administrators to review in case of problems or appeals, etc. The immediate treatment for this particular case might be a quick slap round the face with a cluestick, to remind the administrator that we can see what he's doing. Rob Church

Reply

David Gerard

8:12 a.m.

On 06/12/06, Rob Church <robchur(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On 06/12/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:

>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=Can%27t+sleep%2C+clown+will+eat+me&page=

I would *suggest* encouraging administrators to use whole "units" of time when issuing blocks. No technical reason for this, but that block log looks random and on first glance, suggests that someone's taking blocking to be a bit of a joke. Since those blocks *sound* legit to me, we obviously wouldn't want anybody getting the wrong idea about the user...

I believe several en:wp admins routinely use odd block times for repeat vandals so they don't just come back same time next day. e.g. that's why "31 hours" is one of the listed times on [[Special:Blockip]] on en:wp. See the other blocks for that IP by Clown - it's not a routine thing. - d.

Reply

Jay R. Ashworth

10:11 p.m.

On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 08:12:41AM +0000, David Gerard wrote:

I believe several en:wp admins routinely use odd block times for repeat vandals so they don't just come back same time next day. e.g. that's why "31 hours" is one of the listed times on [[Special:Blockip]] on en:wp. See the other blocks for that IP by Clown - it's not a routine thing.

It's also an easy way to mark your personal blocks, so they can be spotted easily in the list, assuming the list doesn't already show who set the block. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth jra(a)baylink.com Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 (I've been informed that the 'divorce' quote makes me look misogynistic, even though Jennifer Crusie is (pretty obviously) a female romance novelist. So I've removed it. :-)

Reply

xaosflux

7 Dec 7 Dec

2:37 a.m.

I use the fortnight block as well, and if the person being blocked doesn't know what a fortnight is, then I can suggest a certain online encylopedia and/or dictionary they can use to read about it! x ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jay R. Ashworth" <jra(a)baylink.com> To: <wikitech-l(a)wikimedia.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 5:11 PM Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Block message

On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 08:12:41AM +0000, David Gerard wrote:

I believe several en:wp admins routinely use odd block times for repeat vandals so they don't just come back same time next day. e.g. that's why "31 hours" is one of the listed times on [[Special:Blockip]] on en:wp. See the other blocks for that IP by Clown - it's not a routine thing.

It's also an easy way to mark your personal blocks, so they can be spotted easily in the list, assuming the list doesn't already show who set the block. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth jra(a)baylink.com Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 (I've been informed that the 'divorce' quote makes me look misogynistic, even though Jennifer Crusie is (pretty obviously) a female romance novelist. So I've removed it. :-) _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply

George Herbert

2:52 a.m.

On 12/6/06, xaosflux <xaosflux(a)gmail.com> wrote:

I use the fortnight block as well, and if the person being blocked doesn't know what a fortnight is, then I can suggest a certain online encylopedia and/or dictionary they can use to read about it! x ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jay R. Ashworth" <jra(a)baylink.com> To: <wikitech-l(a)wikimedia.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 5:11 PM Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Block message

On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 08:12:41AM +0000, David Gerard wrote:

I believe several en:wp admins routinely use odd block times for repeat vandals so they don't just come back same time next day. e.g. that's why "31 hours" is one of the listed times on [[Special:Blockip]] on en:wp. See the other blocks for that IP by Clown - it's not a routine thing.

It's also an easy way to mark your personal blocks, so they can be spotted easily in the list, assuming the list doesn't already show who set the block. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth jra(a)baylink.com Designer Baylink

RFC

2100 Ashworth & Associates The Things I

Think '87

e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727

647

1274 (I've been informed that the 'divorce' quote makes me look misogynistic, even though Jennifer Crusie is (pretty obviously) a female romance novelist. So I've removed it. :-) _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

_______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Has anyone so blocked vandalized the [[Fortnight]] page yet? 8-) -- -george william herbert george.herbert(a)gmail.com

Reply

Titoxd＠Wikimedia

4:55 a.m.

No, they (or rather, we, as I do it too) do it because 31 is a prime number, while 24 is not. See [[User:Drini/31 hours]]. Titoxd. -----Original Message----- From: David Gerard [mailto:dgerard@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 1:13 AM To: Wikimedia developers Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Block message On 06/12/06, Rob Church <robchur(a)gmail.com> wrote:

On 06/12/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&…

%27t+sleep%2C+clown+will+eat+me&page=

I would *suggest* encouraging administrators to use whole "units" of time when issuing blocks. No technical reason for this, but that block log looks random and on first glance, suggests that someone's taking blocking to be a bit of a joke. Since those blocks *sound* legit to me, we obviously wouldn't want anybody getting the wrong idea about the user...

I believe several en:wp admins routinely use odd block times for repeat vandals so they don't just come back same time next day. e.g. that's why "31 hours" is one of the listed times on [[Special:Blockip]] on en:wp. See the other blocks for that IP by Clown - it's not a routine thing. - d.

Reply

Alphax (Wikipedia email)

8 Dec 8 Dec

10:24 a.m.

Titoxd@Wikimedia wrote:

No, they (or rather, we, as I do it too) do it because 31 is a prime number, while 24 is not. See [[User:Drini/31 hours]].

Excuse me while I dig the primes out of my public key and use that number of seconds... -- Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia "We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP

Reply

Steve Bennett

10 Dec 10 Dec

6:52 a.m.

On 12/7/06, Titoxd@Wikimedia <titoxd.wikimedia(a)gmail.com> wrote:

No, they (or rather, we, as I do it too) do it because 31 is a prime number, while 24 is not. See [[User:Drini/31 hours]].

I don't really get the prime number thing - even with reference to the above page. Is this just being cute? Um...is this a good thing to be cute about? I'm also not sure I really agree with the rationale for strange block times in general. If a vandal reappears every 24 hours, then by blocking for any number between 24 and 48 hours, he just vandalises every 2 days, right? It wouldn't really matter if you chose 25, 48 or anywhere in between. Are there not more sophisticated solutions to these problems? Like blocking for 1 hour, but placing them on a redlist where their edits are subjected to computer approval, and any possibly-good edits are then subjected to human approval, before being allowed through. The huge number of quite lengthy blocks being made each day is bound to be catching out some good contributions. Steve

Reply

6354

days inactive

6359

days old

wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

11 comments

9 participants

tags (0)

participants (9)

Alphax (Wikipedia email)
David Gerard
George Herbert
Jay R. Ashworth
Michael Bimmler
Rob Church
Steve Bennett
Titoxd＠Wikimedia
xaosflux