Re: [OSM-dev] Various types and means of account blocks

2018-09-26 Thread Michael Reichert
Hi,

Am 26.09.2018 um 17:35 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny:
> 24. Sep 2018 17:57 by frede...@remote.org :
>> 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?
> 
> How complicated would be implementing it? I can imagine situation where 
> otherwise
> unproblematic editor changes his username 20 times a day and blocking this
> resolves the problem - but how much effort is needed to implement this 
> compared
> to say three groups "nuke user" (for spam and troll-only accounts), "block 
> all", 
> "block mapping"?

If a user changes his username too frequently, I wonder if he has the
maturity required to edit OpenStreetMap in a productive way. Changing
the username frequently makes following the changes and analysing the
edits more difficult than necessary. Some drafts of the Organised
Editing Policy forbid frequent changes of usernames for a very good
reason (i.e. violating this rule might end in a ban).

Best regards

Michael

-- 
Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
ausgenommen)
I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
dev mailing list
dev@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev


Re: [OSM-dev] Various types and means of account blocks

2018-09-26 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
Overall I would look at how Wikipedia solves it from technical viewpoint.
It is (hopefully) unlikely that we will get more vandals and trolls than 
English-languagewikipedia and they already spend quite significant effort on 
policing dedicated vandals.

24. Sep 2018 17:57 by frede...@remote.org :

> 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?
>




Absolutely no. It would give such person way to say "I was reverting you without

attempt to communicate because that was blocked".




That is just asking for trouble.





> 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.




I agree, blocking mapping only may be really useful. For example user

refusing to communicate in changeset discussions may be blocked until (s)he

responds to comments.


 


> 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?




How complicated would be implementing it? I can imagine situation where 
otherwise

unproblematic editor changes his username 20 times a day and blocking this

resolves the problem - but how much effort is needed to implement this compared

to say three groups "nuke user" (for spam and troll-only accounts), "block 
all", 


"block mapping"?


 


> 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


Re: [OSM-dev] Various types and means of account blocks

2018-09-26 Thread Frederik Ramm
Hi,

On 26.09.2018 10:43, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62773816

Uh, the "discussion" there is currently taking a xenophobic turn that
will lead to more removals maybe it wasn't a good example.

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


Re: [OSM-dev] Various types and means of account blocks

2018-09-26 Thread Frederik Ramm
Hi,

On 24.09.2018 21:05, tigerfell-...@tuta.io wrote:
> Well, as outlined in GitHub, these concepts seem to exist already.
> Number 1 would be called "block" (you could still use the forum, I
> guess) and (2) "suspension" (everything hidden).

Yes. The "everything hidden" bit is very confusing though. One example
from the recent past:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/62773816

There used to be a changeset comment there. The user, and his comment,
were then kicked out. The response to his comment remains, though,
without any apparent motivation.

It would be better to have "(a comment by user X has been removed)" or so.

I guess if someone sets up an account just for adding a spam profile, it
would be ok to remove them without a trace, but once they've
participated in any way (and potentially provoked a response, like
here), you can't really act as if they never existed.

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