There are two common types of account blocks on MediaWiki, which could form the basis for the proposed reform:
1. A block where a user cannot edit any page except their own talk page. 2. A block where a user cannot edit any page at all. So on OSM, it would be: 1. Editing block 2. Full block I think that should take care of it. — ika-chan! > On 24 Sep 2018, at 16:57, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > I would like to start a discussion/brainstorming about the technical > aspects and means of blocking OSM user accounts. > > First of all, the wider OSM community uses a wealth of communications > channels, most of which are not even controlled by us; here I just want > to discuss the actual OSM account and the means of communication > associated with that. > > Currently an account can be blocked (by the DWG for a limited time, or > by admins for arbitrary timespans). There's a UI for that (even though I > think the long-term blocks need manual database fiddling). A blocked > user cannot edit OSM data. They can, however, still use the various > communication functions: write personal messages, write or comment on > diary entries, comment on changesets, and open, close, and comment on > notes. And they can modify their user page, change their account name, > and "befriend" other users. > > Currently, if we wanted to keep someone from using these functions, we'd > have to "suspend" the account altogether, which is almost the same as > deleting it: The account will not be visible any more, at all, and > nobody can log in to it (cf. discussion in > https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1946). > > OSM has largely been spared from obnoxious nutcases that you find online > elsewhere, but our increasing popularity will certainly send a couple of > them our way in the future. > > Some examples of borderline behaviour that we have seen in the past: > > * user creating tons of playful/funny notes, and modifying his user name > several times a day > > * user closing 100s of notes without actually doing something about them > > * user "stalking" another user in changeset comments, writing rant-y > comments in response to everything the other user writes > > * user writing longish, rant-y, unwanted, and off-topic diary comments > to third party's diary entries > > * user sending legal threats to other users in personal messages > > * user adding a "shit list" to his profile page listing the account > names of other mappers they don't like > > I wonder what the best way would be to deal with issues like that. The > ticket I quoted above is from a DWG member suggesting that normal user > blocks should simply be extended to block all the "communication" > functions as well. In the discussion it was suggested that someone > blocked for, say, participating in an edit war, should not necessarily > be prevented from writing and receiving messages. > > Is the opposite true as well - would/should someone given a cool-off > period for being a dick in a discussion still be allowed to do mapping? > > Should a normal user block perhaps simply come in two flavours, "block > mapping only" and "block all"? > > It has been suggested that blocking *all* communication functions might > be problematic because one thing you might expect from someone you have > blocked is that they apologise, or set something right, which they might > not be able to do without the ability to write messages. > > Do we need a full array of permissions - "can change user name", "can > edit own user page", "can write personal messages", etc. - and the > ability to short-time suspend any and all of them? > > Thoughts are welcome. > > This also ties in somewhat with a separate discussion, on how a > prerequisite for allowing children on the platform might be that we can > disable the "social" functions of an account. In that case it would not > be a short-term block, but a whole class of accounts that can edit, but > not participate in discussions (for their own protection). I'm not sure > that can work at all (given that the ability to contact a mapper is very > important to us). Maybe such accounts would have to be linked to a > "responsible" parent account who then gets the messages... > > Bye > Frederik > > -- > Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > dev@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev