[WikiEN-l] Featured editors?

[Marc Riddell]

on 11/12/07 1:23 PM, Relata Refero at refero.relata at gmail.com wrote:

> "Even if admins were blocking a specific POV- so what?" Well, here's why
> that thinking might be dangerous: most banned editors are banned for
> disruptively arguing their POV, nor their POV. If we ban accounts on the
> basis of POVs like already banned editors, that would be a severe error, and
> compromise our neutrality, our effectiveness, and our ability to criticize
> ourselves.
> 
> I'd let this go - I don't normally write in - but it seems that too many
> people have begun believing that 'sounding like' people who are dangerous
> for *other reasons *is in itself reason for banning. That's just happened at
> AN/I, for example which is why I've broken the rules I've set myself and
> written in. We've got to be careful to avoid false positives in our
> identification.
> 
> I agree with Joshua on the effectiveness of textual analysis to catch
> sockpuppets, so don't make this remark about that. It isn't. It's about how
> this method must not appear to be used to scotch criticism of our own on-WP
> behavior.
> 
This is good input, Relata. I wish you would write in more often.

Thanks,

Marc Riddell

> 
> 
> Quoting joshua.zelinsky at yale.edu
> <wikien-l%40lists.wikimedia.org?Subject=%5BWikiEN-l%5D%20Featured%20editors%3F
> &In-Reply-To=20071112103004.GB16056%40psi.co.at>
> *Mon Nov 12 14:16:40 UTC 2007*
> 
>>> Quoting Raphael Wegmann <wegmann at psi.co.at>:
>> 
>>> On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 05:41:21PM -0500, joshua.zelinsky at yale.eduwrote:
>>>> Quoting Raphael Wegmann <raphael at psi.co.at >:
>>>> 
>>>>> Guy Chapman aka JzG schrieb:
>>>>>> On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 18:52:43 +0100, Raphael Wegmann
>>>>>> <raphael at psi.co.at> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> No, the only people who need to fear that are the *already banned*
>>>>>>>> abusers of the project whose socks we are blocking on an almost
>>>>>>>> daily basis.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> And what kind of magic is involved in finding those socks?
>>>>>>> In what way is it different from a witch hunt?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The average sockpuppet is traceable via IP using CheckUser and other
>> 
>>>>>> methods, whereas witch hunts require ducking stools and the like.
>>>>> 
> 
> 
>>> What are those "other methods"? According to WP:SOCK
>>> "similarities in interests and editing style" might help
>>> to detect sockpuppets. If this is the case, how can we
>>> make sure, that we do not block different editors,
>>> who happen to share the same POV? Does it matter at all
>>> since we might call them as well meatpuppets?
>>> How do we prevent admins from blocking not a vandal
>>> but a certain POV?
>> 
>> 
>> Furthermore, even if admins were blocking a specific POV- so what? In
>> order for
>> a POV to look similar to a blocked editor it generally needs to be extreme
>> and
>> with no caring for NPOV. So even if such blocks were occasionally
>> occurring we
>> aren't losing much. Consider for example, some socks of Jason Gastrich
>> we've
>> blocked. At least one of those I think wasn't a Gastrich sock, but it was
>> interested in pretty close to the same thing; spamming and promoting
>> Louisiana
>> Baptist University and whitewashing the article. We didn't lose much for
>> blocking it. Note incidentally, that this isn't the sort of evidence we
>> are
>> talking about above- that sort is almost never wrong.
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l