The impact of Tor upon editors' accountability must be, anyway, clearly
discussed with the Foundation as maintainer (from a legal pov too).
I can be considered a sort of "stakeholder" for patrollers and what I want
is "something" lowering Tor risk of vandalism/sockpuppeting at an ADSL-like
level. Once that level would be reached, to me, you can even block every
non-Tor user ;p
Vito
Inviato con AquaMail per Android
http://www.aqua-mail.com
Il 01 ottobre 2014 09:23:08 Giuseppe Lavagetto <[email protected]>
ha scritto:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 30/09/14 23:02, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
> On 09/30/2014 09:08 AM, Derric Atzrott wrote:
>> "[H]ow can we quantify the loss to Wikipedia, and to society at
>> large, from turning away anonymous contributors? Wikipedians say
>> 'we have to blacklist all these IP addresses because of trolls'
>> and 'Wikipedia is rotting because nobody wants to edit it
>> anymore' in the same breath, and we believe these points are
>> related."
>
> I've been doing adminwork on enwiki since 2007 and I can tell give
> you two anecdotal data points:
>
> (a) Previously unknown TOR endpoints get found out because they
> invariably are the source of vandalism and/or spam.
>
> (b) I have never seen a good edit from a TOR endpoint. Ever.
>
> A third one I can add since I have held checkuser (2009):
>
> (c) I have never seen accounts created via TOR or that edited
> through TOR that weren't demonstrably block evasion, vandalism or
> (most often) spamming.
>
> None of this is TOR-specific, the same observations apply to open
> proxies in general, and the almost totality of hosted servers.
> Long blocks of open proxies or co-lo ranges that time out after
> *years* being blocked invariably start spewing spam and vandalism,
> often the very day the block expired.
>
Hi Marc :)
I know I don't need to convince you that TOR is a good thing in general.
Still, I don't see how the abusive nature of what is being done via
TOR makes it less valuable to our community, in particular in the
post-Snowden era. Without involving countries where freedom of speech
is not legally granted, it is reasonable to assume someone doing an
edit that may look 'unfriendly' to the US or UK governments will feel
uncomfortable doing that without TOR.
If, as it seems right now, the problem is technical (weed out the bots
and vandals) rather than ideological (as we allow anonymous
contributions after all) we can find a way to allow people to edit any
wikipedia via TOR while minimizing the amount of vandalism allowed.
Of course, let's not kid ourselves - it will require some special
measures probably, and editing via TOR would probably end up not being
as easy as editing via a public-facing IP (we may e.g. restrict
publishing via TOR to users that have logged in and have done 5 "good"
edits reviewed by others, or we can use modern bot-detecting
techniques in that case - those are just ideas).
Cheers,
Giuseppe
- --
Giuseppe Lavagetto
Wikimedia Foundation - TechOps Team
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
iEYEARECAAYFAlQrq84ACgkQTwZ0G8La7IAWLgCglkaCutKP64khUn4zXpSsFnlD
HMkAoL4HoAw7Rx4PoGvqo0D5lDKOBawd
=RIjq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
