What is the current set of things you can restrict to? Configurable?
What about setting up the TorBlock extension, similar to the ConfirmEdit
extension (well, maybe a larger list of things that can be restricted).
Basically, so that rather than making it part of the extension, we can
configure what rights or abilities we want the TorBlock extension to
revoke. [Link adding, group rights (edit, move, or even view in the most
restrictive way), edit patterns matching a regex, talkpage editing,
etc...] and also give a flag to higher groups like sysop that disables
the Tor soft blocking.
Then TorBlock can be enabled, and individual communities can decide what
type of bad actions are coming in from Tor to their wiki, and have those
A semi-permissive community could even generally block edits from Tor
users, but permit them to edit talkpages to request edits or moves.
Like with the ConfirmEdit extension, the regex is quite useful. I
actually have /^\s*$/ which generates a captcha when someone tries to
blank an article. Rather than removing editing, that kind of thing could
be used to prevent page blanking coming from Tor users. If tor is used
to pagemove vandalize, then remove move permissions for tor users. If
tor users mass vandalize pages, then remove edit permissions, but allow
them to edit talkpages, or just require autoconfirmed. If they linkspam,
restrict the ability to edit when adding links.
~Daniel Friesen(Dantman) of:
-The Nadir-Point Group (http://nadir-point.com
--It's Wiki-Tools subgroup (http://wiki-tools.com
-And Wikia ACG on Wikia.com
Andrew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 8:17 AM, jayjg
In practice, soft-blocking proxies is the same as
not blocking them at
My understanding is that the primary problem with tor is page-move
vandals such as the user known as 'Grawp'. These were the main
objections to the extension that came from my discussions with
CheckUsers and stewards. In response to this, I implemented the
additional restrictions on tor users becoming autoconfirmed. A number
of CheckUsers were happy with this compromise, but apparently, I
didn't speak to enough of them.
On the CheckUser list there is considerable
opposition to what
appears to be a unilateral over-riding of both local and meta policy,
creating a new policy that might work for a little edited wiki but
would not be appropriate at all on wiki-en. I encourage the developers
to ensure that this change has wide acceptance at the local level and
support from the Foundation before implementing.
Of course, the extension can always be disabled for further
development, but I do encourage those who oppose the use of this
extension to think about alternative treatment of tor by the software
(similar to the expanded autoconfirm limits), rather than simply