[Wikimedia-l] Request for comment on global bans

Steven Walling steven.walling at gmail.com
Fri Jul 6 17:03:26 UTC 2012

On Jul 6, 2012 2:48 AM, "Deryck Chan" <deryckchan at wikimedia.hk> wrote:
> Short answer as I understand it:
> Global blocks are the technical feature and refer to the accounts, the IPs
> and the software capability; global bans are the policy and refer to the
> people who are unwelcome.

Deryck has got it right here. The situation is made more complex by the
fact there currently is no technical mechanism for a global block. In lieu
of that, Stewards etc. have been resorting to locking people out of their
accounts using SUL, which is known as a global lock. A global lock is the
usual way of enforcing a ban, according to the current state of the policy.


> On 6 July 2012 10:44, ENWP Pine <deyntestiss at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Steven,
> >
> > Could you explain the distinctions between https://meta.wikimedia.org/**
> > wiki/Global_locks <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_locks>,
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/**wiki/Global_blocks<
> > and https://meta.wikimedia.org/**wiki/Global_bans<
> > These look to me like they have some redundancy and some areas where
> > diverge. A chart which compares these three side-by-side would be
> >
> > Also, if Global Bans are decided by an RFC on Meta, that gives me
pause. I
> > can envision sockpuppets and meatpuppets attempting to sabotage the
> > and giving Meta checkusers more work to do, potentially much more work,
> > especially if WP:DUCK behaviors need to be evaluated on multiple
> > in multiple languages and/or coordination is needed with checkusers from
> > projects in other languages. I'm a bit more supportive of the process at
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/**wiki/Global_locks<
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_locks>which seems to involve
Stewards making the decision to take a global action
> > based on multiple local projects taking local actions, rather than
> > there was a global community RFC at Meta. I agree with AFBorchert's
> > at the RFC, "Meta is working great for non-controversial project
> > coordination, requests to stewards etc. But Meta is in no way prepared
> > serve as a battleground for a large-scale global ban discussion which
> > tend to revive previous debates at other projects."
> >
> > Maybe I'm missing something here, but I'm thinking that global locks and
> > global blocks would be the best two of the three options to deal with a
> > user who is problematic enough to be unwelcome on all wikis.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Pine
> >
> > ______________________________**_________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.**org <Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l<
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

More information about the Wikimedia-l mailing list