On 6 April 2012 14:28, Platonides <[email protected]> wrote: > Forwarding in behalf of the original user: > > > Platonides wrote: > > K. Peachey wrote: > >> Why would we not want blocked accounts to be processed? > > > > Presumably because an indefinetely blocked name (or worse, oversighted) > > would then need a global block. > > Of course blocked accounts anywhere must not be processed. > > Is there a need to unify old blocked sock/vandal accounts to globally > block them later? No. > > Is there a need to unify oversighted accounts via the wpHideUser > function to globally oversight later? No. > > Do you know that before CentralAuth had the global oversight function > accounts had to be locked at meta and then you need to go wiki by wiki > manually blocking with 'wpHideUser', then manually oversight meta logs? > - Creating global accounts for those users, most of them with personal > information, would be appalling. > > Creating global accounts for blocked accounts creates no benefits but > would be an absolute mistake and would indeed increase the level of work > stewards (I am one) would have to do to fix the problems. > > So, I beg *not* to include blocked accounts anywhere into this proposal. > Vandals, socks and abusive names does not need to be unified so they can > continue vandalizing anywhere, or exposing personal information/libel, etc. > > Best regards.
As it's been over 2 weeks since there was activity on this thread, can the developers get the ball rolling on completing the unification process for these accounts? -- Thehelpfulone _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
