https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44759

Risker <[email protected]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[email protected]

--- Comment #11 from Risker <[email protected]> ---
(In reply to comment #8)

> 
> I think the whole approach being attempted here may be misguided. The issue,
> as
> I see it, may be that Wikimedians have a strange attachment to preserving
> records indefinitely, when perhaps not all records need to be kept
> indefinitely. Is there a reason to not auto-prune block log entries older
> than,
> say, five years? Probably the subject of a separate bug, but definitely worth
> investigating, I think.

There are at least a hundred thousand accounts on English Wikipedia, if not
more, that are blocked indefinitely and will always remain so, and many of them
have been blocked indefinitely for more than 5 years; eventually, all of these
accounts will have been blocked for more than 5 years. Their block logs must
remain so that admins and users in the future will be able to confirm that
they're blocked, why, and when they were blocked. 

I think this is a very good example of a bug that's been filed when people have
brainstormed ideas to make someone feel better when that person felt they were
inappropriately blocked; in other words, a classic example of hard cases making
bad law.  Over time a reasonable and workable process can be worked out, but
this sudden "something must be done!" process isn't helpful in guiding
developers in determining what would genuinely be useful.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are watching all bug changes.
_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l

Reply via email to