Voting for nym

[Jason Holt]

On Tue, 3 Jan 2006, cyphrpunk wrote:
> I would see a proxy as being, from Wikipedia's point of view, like an
> ISP. It would be like aol.com or, more analogously, momandpopisp.com,
> some ISP with a number of users. If one misbehaves at Wikipedia they
> probably don't block the whole ISP. That would be an unfriendly action
> that would give them a bad reputation. Instead they probably make an
> effort to contact someone at the ISP responsible for abuse and tell
> them about the user who caused trouble, letting the ISP block him.
> Only if an ISP were persistently unresponsive to abuse complaints
> would they be justified in blocking the entire ISP, and I imagine that
> this is exactly what they do.

Most ISPs don't use a single outgoing IP address, and I've never seen anyone 
contact an external authority to have a user blocked; we just take care of it 
on wikipedia itself.

I've been doing a lot of "RC Patrol" lately (watching the list of edits for 
vandalism), and frequently high school students will try to turn the article 
about their high school into a message board ("l33tdud3 wuz here, peace to all 
my h0m13z"...).  Standard practice for vandalism is to put increasingly dire 
warning messages on their "user talk" page (which displays a "You have new 
messages" message when they next view a page), then request one of the 
wikipedia admins to block them if they continue.  When their username is 
blocked, their IP is also automatically blocked.  High schools often come 
through a proxy with a single IP, and there's a standard notice that 
eventually gets added to the IP's talk page if both good and bad edits show up 
over time.  It puts admins in a more difficult position, because blocking the 
IP also blocks the good users, and they'll try to be more lenient, but the 
process is ultimately the same.  I've seen individual users vandalize multiple 
pages per minute, and by the time an admin gets around to blocking them, I've 
spent 20 minutes cleaning up after them.  Nobody's going to wait around for an 
email response when something like that's happening.  I can hit the "recent 
changes" link all day long and stay continuously busy repairing vandalism (and 
warning users) even without the prolific vandals that require continuous 
watching.

I agree that Jimmy is an excellent advocate to have.  Maybe somebody else can 
get him interested again. I've emailed him several times without a response, 
although for all I know his spam filter is eating my messages.


 						-J