[WikiEN-l] Servers down?

[George Herbert]

On Jan 17, 2008 7:48 PM, Tim Starling <tstarling at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> George Herbert wrote:
> > On Jan 17, 2008 7:39 PM, Tim Starling <tstarling at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> >> Rjd0060 wrote:
> >>> Ian A Holton wrote:
> >>>> True, a bot would be better. It wouldn't need admin rights, would it?
> >>>>
> >>  >
> >>  > To move, create, and tag for speedy, the bot should *not* need the sysop
> >>  > bit.
> >>
> >> What's wrong with giving bots sysop access? Are you worried they might
> >> rise up and overthrow the human sysops?
> >>
> >> -- Tim Starling
> >
> > Damage control on programming errors, mostly.
>
> Sounds like nonsense to me. It's not like sysops can do anything
> irreversible. You're just wasting the time of human sysops by making them
> do jobs which bots could do.

Take this up with the en.wp bot auth group.

There are bots with admin bit set, run by a few people, but it's a
small subset of the total (and, predictably, where some of the more
really heinous problems came from).

While every action is basically reversible, not all actions are
practically reversible.  While it's unlikely that an admin bot would
be doing stuff which could accidentally lead to some of the nightmare
bot vandalism attack stuff I've gamed out playing red team, I prefer
caution, as do those running en.wp these days.


-- 
-george william herbert
george.herbert at gmail.com