Hi Jim. Thanks for your reply :)
Jim Cecropia wrote:
I don't think there is an issue of anons being
"lesser-users" and I
support allowing anons to edit because I believe it encourages new
editors to try out the Wiki through its openness.
No-where have I implied that I don't want anons to be able to edit. The
problem is that I see an increasing number of sysops rectify unilateral
bans by saying something like, "They should create an account to make
their edits look less like vandalism!" That's just ridiculous.
HOWEVER . . . if we don't think anons bear
watching, why do we have an
option to show only anons on "Recent Changes"?
Anons are indeed worth watching, because for obvious reasons vandalism
tends to be from anons. This is not the point.
The point is that no matter what an anon does, they should *not* have a
higher chance of being classified as "vandals" or even getting blocked
than a logged-in user. Currently they do because the prevailing... let's
say "convention" among sysops is to regard anons as lesser folk who are
less worthy of tolerance. I don't think I like that sentiment.
Greetings,
Timwi