Thanks for the explanations. I always thought of the Superprotect function as a technical way to react in a social-legal space of tension. A discussion about the technical function is much less interesting than about the real issue, of how to improve the MediaWiki software with regard to the different needs of different actors (readers, contributors, maybe others).
Andy, would you mind to explain what to mean exactly with "offensive"?
Kind regards Ziko
2015-11-09 0:04 GMT+01:00 Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk:
On Nov 8, 2015 9:34 PM, "Quim Gil" qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
the Q&A included more details:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process/2015-11-05#Wh...
The main reason to act upon Superprotect now is the updated product development process https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process in the drafts, which we want to discuss and agree with the communities. This new process should make Superprotect unnecessary; removing it upfront was a logical step.
I have added these points in the Q&A:
Why is Superprotect being removed?
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process/2015-11-05#Wh...
Why is the WMF doing this now?
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WMF_product_development_process/2015-11-05#Wh...
I hope this clarifies that sentence.
Referring to "misbehaviour" in this context is extremely offensive; the initial use of superprotect was not a response to "misbehaviour". _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe