|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| ''(Content here is cut/pasted from Village Pump for reference as of 16:30, 30 September 2006 (PDT))''
| | :''For old comments see the [[Appropedia talk:Anti-spam and anti-vandalism/Archive|'''Archive''']].'' |
| | |
| I've assumed that the reason anonymous editing isn't allowed on Appropedia is to prevent vandalism. Wikipedia does allow anonymous editing, but has a much larger community, including lots of technically minded and Wikipedia-obsessed people, running bots and watching recent changes via IRC channel... so vandalism generally gets reverted very quickly (e.g. [[Wikipedia:User:Tawkerbot2|Tawkerbot2]] typically reverts vandalism in something like 15 seconds).
| |
| | |
| Now, obviously we can't compare with that, yet... but are we in agreement that it's desirable to allow anonymous editing if we can minimise the effect of vandalism and spam? I would like to see this allowed, as my experience & observations on Wikipedia suggest that:
| |
| * the lower barrier to entry means more contributions
| |
| * anonymous editors can end up getting more involved, registering and contributing regularly
| |
| * most anonymous contributions are actually valuable - I had assumed that most of the "bad edits" would be from anonymous editors, but when I've checked, that hasn't been the case at all.
| |
| | |
| If we did want to go down this path, we'd have to think about how we do it in a smaller community of editors like this one. Even if we grow by a factor of 10 or 100, we won't have Wikipedia-like abilities for fighting vandalism. So how could we do it - is there a way we could safely allow anonymous users?
| |
| | |
| Some suggested steps:
| |
| * Perhaps someone ([[User:Lonny|Lonny]]?) knows where to ask for advice on this, e.g. on a [http://www.mediawiki.org/ MediaWiki.org] technical discussion page/list.
| |
| * Wikipedia has a feature, where if an anonymous editor adds a link in their edit, they are required to do one of those anti-automation things where you read the funny-looking letters and type them in.
| |
| * Perhaps we should follow Wikipedia's example in not allowing anon editors to create pages.
| |
| * Do some more [[Appropedia:Promotion of Appropedia|Promotion of Appropedia]], mentioning it on permaculture, eco-village and [[sustainability]] lists, sites with a similar kind of focus, and to organisations like the various [[Wikipedia:Engineers Without Borders|Engineers Without Borders]] organisations.
| |
| * Make sure we have a robust [[Appropedia:Recent changes patrol|Recent changes patrol]]. (I'm not sure if this requires people to be [[Appropedia:admin|admin]]s, in order to be able to "Mark as patrolled"). If we have a large enough "[[Appropedia:RC patrol|RC patrol]]" (like [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Recent changes patrol|Recent changes patrol on Wikipedia]]) with members in a range of time zones, and with differing sleeping habits, we can come close to a 24 hour patrol. Note that the RC patrol is not just for vandalism - it's to check recent edits more generally, doing touch-ups, fixing links, making sure new pages are in the right categories, etc.
| |
| * Learn about using the anti-vandalism tools and bots used on Wikipedia. Starting at [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Vandalism|Vandalism]] should lead to some relevant links. See also these tools developed by Wikipedians: [[Wikipedia:User:Henna/VF|Vandalfighter]], [[Wikipedia:User:Lupin/Anti-vandal tool|Lupin's anti-vandal tool]] and [[Wikipedia:User:AmiDaniel/VandalProof|VandalProof]]. Also, see the upcoming (4 August 2006) Wikimania talk on anti-vandalism tools [http://wikimania2006.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proceedings:FB1 here].
| |
| | |
| Thoughts? --[[User:Singkong2005|Singkong2005]] ''<small>a.k.a. [[User:Chriswaterguy| Chriswaterguy]]''</small> <sup><small>[[User talk:Singkong2005|t]] - [[Special:Contributions/Singkong2005|c]]</small></sup> 21:18, 30 July 2006 (PDT)
| |
| | |
| :What do you think about temporarily opening up Appropedia to watch the effects? Then maybe we can look at appropriate measures for securing against vandalism. I have been researching the topic, and it seems quite difficult to patrol without antivandal software. (un)Fortunately we are quite far below the radar, and maybe that will afford us some time to grow without much vandalism. I will try to make it to some of the online wikimania talks, but I am currently on a boat in Mexico, with very limited internet access. Some vandalism will be caught and fixed quickly, because I am (un)fortunately addicted to [[Special:Recentchanges]]. --[[User:Lonny|Lonny]] 14:06, 3 August 2006 (PDT)
| |
| | |
| ::I agree - let's open it up and see how it goes.
| |
| | |
| ::I see anti-vandalism measures as essential, and deserving of ongoing attention, but we don't have to wait for them to be rock-solid before we try opening up.
| |
| | |
| ::The next thing to look at, IMO, is the feature that prevents the addition of web addresses by anonymous editors without verifying they're a human editor (by reading the wavy letters). Wikipedia has it, and the Wikimania 2006 site, each with different settings (Wikipedia only requires it of anon editors, which is a better idea for this site, I think).
| |
| | |
| ::Perhaps the most useful tool is the recent changes page. Even better would be if we could choose to show only anonymous edits. [[Wikipedia:User:Lupin/Anti-vandal tool|Lupin's anti-vandal tool]] has something like this, and doesn't require software - it just uses changes to a ".js" page... however, I didn't work for me, when I tried it (in Wikipedia), possibly due to the fact that I'm on Linux at the moment. --[[User:Singkong2005|Singkong2005]] ''<small>a.k.a. [[User:Chriswaterguy| Chriswaterguy]]''</small> <sup><small>[[User talk:Singkong2005|t]] - [[Special:Contributions/Singkong2005|c]]</small></sup> 18:45, 3 August 2006 (PDT)
| |
| | |
| :::Alright, Appropedia is now open for a test run. Here are a few of my concerns:
| |
| :::#Vandalism
| |
| :::#Less accountability
| |
| :::#Less establishment of a social network
| |
| :::#Users forgetting to login (quite a few small ramifications, especially for Programs and Organization directors)
| |
| | |
| :::I have asked [[User:Ajay|Ajay]] to work on the antivandalism measures, anybody else interested in helping? --[[User:Lonny|Lonny]] 17:10, 5 August 2006 (PDT)
| |
| | |
| ''(end of paste from Village Pump --[[User:Curtbeckmann|Curtbeckmann]] 16:30, 30 September 2006 (PDT))''
| |
|
| |
|
| == RE: Suggestions == | | == RE: Suggestions == |
| Line 56: |
Line 17: |
|
| |
|
| --[[User:Lonny|Lonny]] 09:53, 17 April 2007 (PDT) | | --[[User:Lonny|Lonny]] 09:53, 17 April 2007 (PDT) |
|
| |
| == ''XXXXXX is the perfect program for promotion!'' ==
| |
|
| |
| ''XXXXXX 4.0 is the best tool for promotion!''
| |
| ''It's have CAPTCHA recognizer, email verificator, and a lot of other functions...''
| |
|
| |
| ''But. I forgot link to it :(''
| |
|
| |
| ''Can you give me link to the XXXXXX description? screenshots, etc.''
| |
|
| |
| ''Thanks''
| |
|
| |
| :The above comment copied from [[Talk:Burning Man Evaporative Cooler/]] by an [[User_talk:85.140.222.182|anon]]. It looks almost like a human edit, so I left a note. Suspicious choice of page to add to though.
| |
|
| |
| :And googling XXXXXX (I've X'd out the program name to avoid giving it any search engine juice) finds what is presumably one of the annoying bot programs. I won't reward them with a link, but it says:
| |
| ::XXXXXX is a software application that automatically posts your messages to forums, guestbooks, bulletin boards and catalogs of the links (as well as into livejournals and wiki). In a word it is an autosubmitter.
| |
|
| |
| :Also claims to get around CAPTCHAs and all manner of hurdles... clearly exaggerating, but one wouldn't expect ethical behavior from someone selling such a bot :-). --[[User:Chriswaterguy|Chriswaterguy]] · <small>[[User talk:Chriswaterguy|talk]]</small> 01:58, 4 November 2007 (PDT)
| |
