On 2 Sep 2009, at 21:52, MP wrote: >>> be added at the right side of every changeset line. One click might >>> report "succeed" or "conflict/failed, do it manually". >> >> Until this is possible I want to try to (or at least collect all >> necessary information to) write an external tool for this. > > Adding "revert" to main site could attract vandals (ok, let's just > revert stuff) or experimentators (what does this button do?). I think > better would be to have it as external tool that can either revert or > prepare file for reverting (so that it would be loaded, checked and > uploaded in JOSM) - reverting should be easy, but not that easy, that > it would suffice to click one button to revert. >
Only 'established users' can upload images to Wikipedia and I would suggest that the revert option is only available to established OSM users. It would need to take many edits to get 'established' but it means that there are some controls on 'drive-by vandals' who register and then cause mischief. I guess one can loose one's 'established user' credentials by partaking in vandalism. >> Maybe such a tool could block such revert-reverts (A revert's Bs >> changeset, B reverts As revert) and only allow them to others, to >> avoid >> revert-wars. Maybe this should only happen after two rounds? > > How do you (automatically) distinguish revert from ordinary edit (or > "almost-revert" from ordinary edit)? I think you can't at least not > reliably (you can't rely on the commit message, etc ...) I am not sure you need to. Not all reverts in Wikipedia use the revert mechanism, because for complex multiple edit vandalism it is easier to go back to a previoud version and cut the text from there and paste it in again. The main thing is to be able to see the differences between now and then for an area and decide what sort of revert is appropriate. For a simple single changeset a revert might often be good, however sometimes one might decide one needed to revert a part of the dataset wholesale. Not sure why. A good tool might be able to identify a revert war by spotting tags for features that are flipping backwards and forwards frequently or tags that get created and deleted. Basically any feature that returns to a recent state again a number of times in a short period. > > So for avoiding revert war we need to use same mechanisms as for > avioding any other unwanted edits - block users/IP's from editing, etc These are surely the last line of defence and are easily circumvented unless the other devices are also in place. To start with we need to be able to deal with the basic drive-by vandal (using a simple revert) and then be able to deal with people registering many names and doing a few edits with each (white lists and patrols might help here). For revert wars we need detection of flip-flopping features and we need human arbitrators. Only if all that fails do we need to start banning people which is something which only the Data Working Group can do - everything else if for the community to organise. Regards, Peter > ... > > Martin > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
