On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 9:10 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
2008/6/5 Andrew Garrett andrew@epstone.net:
Of course, the extension can always be disabled for further development, but I do encourage those who oppose the use of this extension to think about alternative treatment of tor by the software (similar to the expanded autoconfirm limits), rather than simply hard-blocking tor.
You're speaking to people who've been there and done that.
In practice, soft-blocking Tor is equivalent to not blocking at all. I've looked. Have you?
I'm not suggesting a plain soft-block. I'm suggesting special treatment. For instance, we can handle sockpuppetry by marking edits made through tor as such in recent changes. When users have their edits revealed as made through tor, they'll go back to their open proxy farms which aren't as easily identified. I'm not sure how we sit with this in terms of the privacy policy, however.