----- Forwarded message from Jimmy Wales <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ----- From: Jimmy Wales <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 18:26:48 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Abuse resistant anonymous publishing - Proposed solution to the Wikipedia issue. User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Macintosh/20050317) Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ben Burch wrote:
> The biggest problem I see is that if moderation is commissive, rather
> than reactive, then if the original poster commits a crime (like
> violating the Official Secrets Act) then the moderator who approves the
> posting would likely be liable for the same crime.
Well, at least with respect to Wikipedia there are a few misconceptions
I should clear up. First, something like that wouldn't be appropriate
for Wikipedia on editorial grounds. ("No original research") -- we have
specific intellectual standards that would generally preclude that sort
of thing.
Second, 'moderation' at wikipedia is reactive. That is, people
vandalize, and then we clean it up.
> The only solution I can think of that would allow Tor and Wiki to
> interoperate would be to have a Tor-Wikipedia Moderation Team who would
> actively look for Wikipedia vandalism originating from Tor exit nodes,
> and revert out vandal's postings promptly.
>
> The support we would need from Wikipedia would be minor; Wiki would
> have to implement a Watch function for postings from Tor exit nodes
> that the Tor-Wikipedia moderation team would get email notifications
> on. There already are exit node listings that would allow Wikipedia to
> create and refresh this list on a regular basis, and obviously they can
> already do that as they have implemented a block. Wikipedia would have
> to agree that the Tor-Wikipedia Moderation Team would have the right to
> revert ANY change from a Tor exit node without discussion. Once the
> vandals realize that they won't have any fun using Tor to vandalize
> Wikipedia, the job of the TWMT would get quite easy, as I don't imagine
> there would be more than a few dozen real edits on any given day from
> the Tor cloud.
>
> Or am I barking up the wrong tree here?
Well, it seems unlikely that we could recruit enough people to do this
effectively. We already have a huge number of people monitoring the
site, people who are (mostly) sympathetic to Tor's aims, but they get
tired of it.
--Jimbo
----- End forwarded message -----
--
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org";>leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
