[Foundation-l] Release of squid log data

[Anthony]

There are plenty of admins that happily make their real identity
public knowledge and apparently aren't so afraid of "stalkers" that
they're unwilling to block people.  There's probably at least one of
them online 24 hours a day.  Get one of them to make the block.

If there are some gaps in that 24 hour coverage, hire someone to fill
in those gaps.  Pay them enough that they can buy a PO box, an alarm
system for their house, etc.  How does society handle having judges
and police and presidents and soldiers and other figures who have to
make and enforce decisions that rile up a few nutters?  Not by making
them unaccountable for their actions.  If Wikipedia is a serious
project creating a real benefit to society, why shouldn't it do the
same thing?  Being part of the wikipolice is surely less dangerous
than being part of the real police.

On 9/20/07, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 20/09/2007, SlimVirgin <slimvirgin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The only workable solution I can see is to make it less likely that
> > stalkers will want to target particular admins.
>
>
> It's tricky. The problem is that a lot of the people who get blocked
> are blocked because they're arseholes or nutters. They will take a
> block for whatever reason as an unacceptable assault against (a) their
> ego or (b) the REVEALED TRUTH (in capitals). This then gives them an
> exciting new holy mission in life.
>
>
> > One way to do that
> > would be to set up anonymous admin accounts that multiple admins could
> > use. So for example, if a difficult user needs to be blocked, any
> > admin could access the joint admin account to make the block. The user
> > would only see that User:Admin1 had blocked him. Only trusted people
> > would have access to which admin had made a block with User:Admin1 at
> > time T.
> > I know it would complicate things, and it might make admin abuse a
> > little more likely. And we'd still have the problem of potential
> > leaks, so it wouldn't be foolproof by any means.
>
>
> Crikey, I'm trying to imagine how paranoid people would get with that
> in place compared to now. It strikes me as disastrous public relations
> to remove any accountability or traceability. If you think the
> paranoids are bad now ...
>
> A solution to an edge case that breaks the normal case is unlikely to
> gain traction.
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>