- From: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 11:54:19 -0500
- To: Eliot Graff <Eliot.Graff@microsoft.com>
- CC: Janet Swisher <jswisher@mozilla.com>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
Hi, folks- Before we make a judgment on this, I'd like to know how much of a problem this is, in terms of sheer numbers. How many people have complained? 1? 5? 10? 100? Regards- -Doug On 12/4/12 11:34 AM, Eliot Graff wrote: > Just curious. How does Wikipedia structure this? I don’t know, offhand. > > Thanks, > > Eliot > > *From:*Janet Swisher [mailto:jswisher@mozilla.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, December 4, 2012 8:28 AM > *To:* public-webplatform@w3.org > *Subject:* Re: Anonymous editing trial. > > +1 on trying out anonymous edits. I know I was one of those who argued > against it, but if we're getting pushback about it, I'm open to trying it. > > Just wondering (do NOT block on this): is it possible to have MW suggest > that an anonymous editor (with a given IP address) create an account, > after some number of edits? Kind of a "Glad you like it here -- care to > introduce yourself?" thing. > > On 12/3/12 1:58 PM, Jonathan Garbee wrote: > > I think we should give anonymous editing in the docs a trial run. > There have been a few who have spoken about not wanting an account > to edit. Tomato has done a great job with getting some Abuse > Filters in place as well. So, I think we should at least give it a > shot for a while. See if anything bad happens (which probably will) > but tweak the systems to take care of it mostly automatically. > > I understand the need to try and get a sense of community, but > honestly some people just don't care. They see something wrong and > want to fix it. Should we not encourage that kind of mentality as > well? > > Thoughts? > > -Garbee > > -- > > Janet Swisher <mailto:jREMOVEswisher@mozilla.com> > > Mozilla Developer Network <https://developer.mozilla.org> > > Technical Writer/Community Steward >
Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2012 16:54:30 UTC