On 4/4/07, Phil Sandifer <Snowspinner(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On Apr 4, 2007, at 12:53 PM, gjzilla(a)gmail.com wrote:
This is worrying. We should probably try and keep an eye on these
places.
Probably. Either they're just a lot of hot air, or serious. Anyone
willing
to be a double agent on one of these?
Why? It's just vandalism. Even if they block out the bulk of the
normal RC patrol and CVU it'll get stopped quickly and undone. Yes,
it'd be a bit of work to undo. But it would be far less work than
trying to watch every place vandals might be planning something.
-Phil
Yeah - especially these days, the effort it takes to get one admin account
is probably
enough to dissuade almost anyone who wants to get one to do evil. Trying to
get 10 of them would take an awful lot of effort.
Of course, trying to take out RC patrollers is probably one of the least
efficient ways to do harm with an admin account.
Another interesting group: "Abolish Abstinence-Only Wikipedia
Education" (97 members):
"Is anyone else tired of listening to clueless teachers bash
Wikipedia? They complain that it can't be used for research because
it's "not a source." They tell you that anyone can write whatever they
want, so it must be wrong. I've even heard teachers say that "the
author" makes stuff up.
Our schools say "Sex is bad, but we're going to tell you how to do it
safely just in case." Why don't they apply the same policy to
Wikipedia-- teaching students about the proper way to use it instead
of indiscriminately banning it. These teachers are well aware that
students are going to continue using Wikipedia anyway. I'm convinced
that they just don't understand what Wikipedia is or how to use it."
--
Oldak Quill (oldakquill(a)gmail.com)