ScoutWiki:Community Portal: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
(c4tpas)
m (Reverted edits by 210.22.158.132 (Talk); changed back to last version by 195.229.242.57)
Line 1: Line 1:
bodelvardelr
tasitzel
tasitzel
'''Community Portal includes discussion about the project. '''
'''Community Portal includes discussion about the project. '''
Line 16: Line 15:
== Spam control ==
== Spam control ==


There are currently quite many infinite blocks. I'm quite sure none of those actually need to infinite – the spammers don't probably even have the same IP any more, they've changed it a million times already for the blocks created on June. Some of the blocks even block creation of accounts!  
There are currently quite many infinite blocks. I'm quite sure none of those actually need to infinite – the spammers don't probably even have the same IP any more, they've changed it a million times already for the blocks created on June. Some of the blocks even block creation of accounts!  


So, we need to think about spam control. Spam control with the amount of spam we currently have here would be relatively easy if we had enough activity – however in the current situation in which most of the entries on [[Special:Recentchanges]] are blocks, deletions and reverts of spam, it just doesn't work.  
So, we need to think about spam control. Spam control with the amount of spam we currently have here would be relatively easy if we had enough activity – however in the current situation in which most of the entries on [[Special:Recentchanges]] are blocks, deletions and reverts of spam, it just doesn't work.  


We can't keep on giving those infinite blocks. Instead we need to figure out a decent duration after which the block expires – two weeks, month, two months — pretty much anything but infinite. Also, we need to think if we need to allow anonymous edits at all. It seems the only reasonable edits are done by logged-in users anyway, so I think it'd be a feasible option. --[[User:ZeiP|ZeiP]] 03:58, 17 November 2007 (EET)
We can't keep on giving those infinite blocks. Instead we need to figure out a decent duration after which the block expires – two weeks, month, two months — pretty much anything but infinite. Also, we need to think if we need to allow anonymous edits at all. It seems the only reasonable edits are done by logged-in users anyway, so I think it'd be a feasible option. --[[User:ZeiP|ZeiP]] 03:58, 17 November 2007 (EET)


I think that it would be good to block anonymous edits. I avoid giving infinite blocks, but all admins should do so. [[User:Juham|Juham]] 00:25, 3 December 1907 (EET)
I think that it would be good to block anonymous edits. I avoid giving infinite blocks, but all admins should do so. [[User:Juham|Juham]] 00:25, 3 December 1907 (EET)