https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22713

Gurch <matthew.brit...@btinternet.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |matthew.brit...@btinternet.
                   |                            |com

--- Comment #1 from Gurch <matthew.brit...@btinternet.com> 2010-03-03 17:33:39 
UTC ---
I would consider that a feature, not a bug.

Rollback can only restore previous versions of pages, and said previous
versions can only exist if they got past the abuse filter in the first place.

Sure, if you really wanted to, you can search through recent changes and find a
page where rollback will reintroduce vandalism, and then do the rollback. But
if you have members of one of your privileged groups deliberately doing that,
you have worse problems than the abuse filter.

It is better to allow rollback to fix vandalism and trust your privileged group
to use the tool correctly, than to end up having vandalism that *cannot* be
removed because the previous version of the page trips some obscure filter.
Because then you have a situation where you have to get an administrator in to
fix the problem (I have no doubt you've given your administrators a free pass
on all filters, just like en.wikipedia has).

Why do you even want to create filters that apply to your privileged group (did
I mention this is a *privileged group* here?) If you don't trust them to edit
properly without your supervision, why are they in the group in the first
place? Enough of the 'us vs. them' mentality.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.

_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l

Reply via email to