[WikiEN-l] Editing with open proxies

[Sheldon Rampton]

Slim Virgin wrote:

> On 6/18/07, Sheldon Rampton <sheldon at prwatch.org> wrote:
>> Jayjg ... added ominously that *someone* has been
>> leaking information about deleted pages to Wikitruth.
>
> There's no question that someone with at least one admin account
> posted deleted material to Wikitruth. How else do you imagine it got
> there?

I agree that it's likely (though not 100% proven) that someone with  
an admin account posted deleted material to Wikitruth. This doesn't  
alter the fact that Jayjg went off-topic by bringing up Wikitruth in  
the context of this discussion, which is about editing with open  
proxies (and raising it as an issue in user CharlotteWebb's RfA). No  
one has presented any evidence connecting user CharlotteWebb with  
Wikitruth. No one has presented any evidence suggesting that anyone  
used a TOR proxy in any way to obtain the admin account which you  
believe is responsible for posting material to Wikitruth. Since  
CharlotteWebb is not a sysop, we know it's not her in any case. So  
why is WIkitruth being dragged into this discussion?

>> To embellish it with ad
>> hominem references to unrelated topics such as WR and WikiTruth takes
>> it into tinfoil hats territory.
>
> You might want to take into account that there are issues you're not
> aware of. And the "tinfoil hats" insult is unhelpful.

If there are issues I'm not aware of, make me aware of them.  
Otherwise I have to believe that my statement above accurately  
characterizes the absurdity of bringing up WR and Wikitruth in the  
context of this discussion. Jayjg brings up WR and Wikitruth anytime  
his actions are criticized. Moreover, he routinely uses insulting  
language, referring to every question or concern that anyone raises  
as "conspiracy theories," "ranting," etc. Have you advised *him* to  
lay off the insults?

I should note for the record that I see a difference in this regard  
between Slim Virgin and Jayjg. I disagree with Slim Virgin's  
analysis, but her tone at least has generally been civil.

I should also note that I don't see evidence yet suggesting that  
Jayjg's actions in l'affaire CharlotteWeb are based on the sort of  
"political" motives that some people here have suggested. I think  
it's just a mistake, probably reflecting excessive officiousness and  
nothing more.

>> There's
>> probably no way to prevent someone from getting admin status and
>> using it indefinitely for purposes that CANNOT be visibly connected
>> to their user name (such as looking up deleted pages).
>
> As I said earlier, your argument is like that of an airline that
> withdraws all security measures because 100 percent security is
> impossible.
>
> We can't prevent it, but we can make it harder.

You're making a straw man argument. I haven't advocated "withdrawing  
all security measures" from Wikipedia, and I haven't seen anyone else  
argue for that either. The question is not WHETHER to have security  
measures but WHAT KIND of security measures to have.

An airline that screens passengers for weapons is using an effective  
security measure. An airline that turned away all passengers who  
haven't flown recently would just be alienating customers for no  
security benefit.

Similarly, a security argument could be made for desysopping admins  
with easily crackable passwords, but desysopping people simply  
because they're not currently active is just a bad idea. I'm all for  
security, but chasing phantoms actually HURTS security.

--------------------------------
|  Sheldon Rampton
|  Research director, Center for Media & Democracy (www.prwatch.org)
|  Author of books including:
|     Friends In Deed: The Story of US-Nicaragua Sister Cities
|     Toxic Sludge Is Good For You
|     Mad Cow USA
|     Trust Us, We're Experts
|     Weapons of Mass Deception
|     Banana Republicans
|     The Best War Ever
--------------------------------
|  Subscribe to our free weekly list serve by visiting:
|  http://www.prwatch.org/cmd/subscribe_sotd.html
|
|  Donate now to support independent, public interest reporting:
|  http://www.prwatch.org/donate
--------------------------------