Difference between revisions of "WikiChristian:Village pump"

From WikiChristian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Users Who Vandalize WikiChristian)
(Users Who Vandalize WikiChristian: only a little bit agree)
Line 23: Line 23:
 
Around Christmas time 2008 we had a few registered users vandalize certain pages on WikiChristian and post inappropriate photos. Should we screen those who create logins and find out their intentions before we let them create a login? Some people create logins on wikis for the purpose of vandalizing the site. Wikipedia has a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism number of suggestions] to help deal with vandals.  
 
Around Christmas time 2008 we had a few registered users vandalize certain pages on WikiChristian and post inappropriate photos. Should we screen those who create logins and find out their intentions before we let them create a login? Some people create logins on wikis for the purpose of vandalizing the site. Wikipedia has a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism number of suggestions] to help deal with vandals.  
 
--[[User:DavidSpencer.ca|DavidSpencer.ca]] 23:46, 28 December 2008 (PST)
 
--[[User:DavidSpencer.ca|DavidSpencer.ca]] 23:46, 28 December 2008 (PST)
 +
: Some people want to be destructive and are willing to give their real name, email and more just to get at Christians.  The more steps we put in ''their'' way, the more we're putting in the way of regular people who might want to contribute.  Extra evil people will always exist and the steps we've taken preclude 99% of anonymous spam without inconveniencing human beings at all.  I think we do almost enough as is.  The guideline, however, which appear on the "block" page are ludicrously weak and don't take into account zombie computers or malicious sexual predators: they should be strengthened.  --[[User:Aquatiki|Aquatiki]] 23:55, 28 December 2008 (PST)

Revision as of 07:55, 29 December 2008

Archives
  1. Beginning - September 2007
Shortcut:
WC:VP
WC:VILLAGE
WC:PUMP


This page is the main discussion forum for WikiChristian. Please bring up any technical or organizational topics here. See also: Help:Contents page.

Anonymous edits?

Vandalism seems to be on the decrease at WikiChristian. I wonder if now is a good time to re-allow anonymous edits. Any opinions? Plus, if we decide to do that, how do we do it? --Graham 07:13, 17 October 2008 (PDT)

It's a server-side. If it's the consensus, I can do it in two seconds. --Aquatiki 23:00, 17 October 2008 (PDT)
Well, let's wait and see if anyone else comments. KW is the only other user who tends to work on WikiChristian daily. The users, India, PB Pilhet and Theologian seem to stop by on around a weekly basis. Prab of course drops in a sorts out problems from time to time. I reckon we wait a couple more days, and if no one else comments, and you're agreeable, go ahead and make the change. And if vandalism seems to rear its ugly head again, then we'll go back to the current system quick-smart. Thanks. --Graham 23:10, 17 October 2008 (PDT)
No one else has commented. I say let's change it so anonymous editors can edit again. If we run in to problems with vandalism then we can reassess and revert back to the current system. --Graham 16:38, 21 October 2008 (PDT)
Done. --Aquatiki 21:53, 21 October 2008 (PDT)


Users Who Vandalize WikiChristian

Around Christmas time 2008 we had a few registered users vandalize certain pages on WikiChristian and post inappropriate photos. Should we screen those who create logins and find out their intentions before we let them create a login? Some people create logins on wikis for the purpose of vandalizing the site. Wikipedia has a number of suggestions to help deal with vandals. --DavidSpencer.ca 23:46, 28 December 2008 (PST)

Some people want to be destructive and are willing to give their real name, email and more just to get at Christians. The more steps we put in their way, the more we're putting in the way of regular people who might want to contribute. Extra evil people will always exist and the steps we've taken preclude 99% of anonymous spam without inconveniencing human beings at all. I think we do almost enough as is. The guideline, however, which appear on the "block" page are ludicrously weak and don't take into account zombie computers or malicious sexual predators: they should be strengthened. --Aquatiki 23:55, 28 December 2008 (PST)