> I imagine these sites work from the frantic effort of very large > numbers of contributors (much larger than we should expect). > Twenty-four hours per day, there is someone monitoring edits to their > favourite wikipedia page. From complaints I've seen from burnt-out > contributors, the spam and junk is removed by shear physical effort > (with clever tools).
I agree that it will be a decent amount of work to keep the proposed vim tips wiki somewhat spam-free. On the plus side, I imagine that the tip authors will be very willing to help keep their tips free of spam and vandalism. > Also, we should expect spam to get much worse. I agree here too somewhat, but we can also expect anti-spam tools to improve, especially in the Wikipedia community. > So, I think that requiring vimtip admins to suffer a bit of pain in > managing the entry of tips and changes would probably be less effort > than what would be required to clean up vandalism. The people who don't want to use the Google Wiki (or some other equally cumbersome solution) aren't trying to avoid work. We're not worried about the work load; we're worried about usability for tip editors. I'm sure that if we all put our head together, we could come up with a iron-clad "tips" site that is very easy to administer and virtually spam-free. The only problem is that it would be so cumbersome to use that very few people would actually add any tips. This seems counter-productive to me since easier access is one of the main reasons that so many people want to move the tips to a wiki. > How often are tips added or changed? Look at the effort that people > put into this mailing list ... I would have thought that manually > tweaking tips would be manageable. Yes, we could just manage everything via the mailing list, and it wouldn't be much work for the admins. I just don't think that 80% of potential tip editors would go through the hassle, and that's saying a lot when you consider how technically proficient most Vim users are. > Would someone please check how the Google wiki would work if a > malicious admin were accidentally added. Is there a super-admin? There are two types of users in a Google project, members and owners. Members have access to *everything* except the "project administration" tab. If a malicious user were added as a member, he/she could very easily wreck the wiki because it's stored in an SVN repository, to which he/she has full write access.
