[Foundation-l] Policy proposal: Anti-vandal fighter role

[mike.lifeguard]

Apparently those who believe that common sense is enough are limited to you
and I[1] - everyone else needs reams and reams of instructions to be
satisfied that people won't abuse tools. If we're choosing people for their
judgment, and we do it well enough, then a simply guideline should be
sufficient (rather than bloated instructions like we're currently
developing)

Mike
[1] That is a rhetorical device since there plainly /are/ others in this
category. But that doesn't make my point quite as well.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Harald Søby [mailto:jhsoby at gmail.com] 
Sent: June 11, 2008 6:29 PM
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Policy proposal: Anti-vandal fighter role

I too think that that policy is too narrow. It lacks one essential
point: "use common sense". That ought to do the trick.

2008/6/11, Wily D <wilydoppelganger at gmail.com>:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 4:26 PM, Bryan Tong Minh
> <bryan.tongminh at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:22 PM, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net>
>> wrote:
>>> Milos Rancic wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 8:41 PM, Brian McNeil
>>>> <brian.mcneil at wikinewsie.org> wrote:
>>>>
> ndation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsu>>>> There is one issue from the GRU policy proposal I have ported
>> from
>>>>> Wikipedia. It specifies that those with the right to view deleted
>>>>> contributions should not do so in order to disseminate the content of
>>>>> the
>>>>> deleted contributions to third parties.
>>>>>
>>>>> How do we know? There is no log of who views deleted pages except for
>>>>> whatever Brion and the other devs can access. Do we need such a log?
>>>>>
>>>>> This is an interesting issue for Wikinews as two controversial deleted
>>>>> articles were passed to Wikileaks. I doubt knowing who accessed the
>>>>> deleted
>>>>> content would get us any closer to knowing who was responsible for the
>>>>> leak,
>>>>> but it would narrow the field.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There are no logs (maybe in the future?). You should ask people from
>>>> en.wp how do they deal with their own admins. It is about social
>>>> engineering, not about a technical one.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> If the logs show that several people have accessed th page how can you
>>> know which one was responsible for the leak?
>>>
>>> Ec
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>
>> Stuff that is worth leaking should probably be oversighted since that
>> is what the tool was made for.
>>
>> Bryan
>>
> Oversighting is covered by a specific policy
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Oversight and (at least on English
> Wikipedia) Oversighters won't go outside of it (at least, anymore).
> You would be agast to know what they'll decline to oversight.
>
> WilyD
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


-- 
Jon Harald Søby
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Harald_S%C3%B8by