I am familiar with other incidents myself, and would not consider moving away from the existing system "premature optimization". I would consider it "sanity". We exist in a situation where wikis can individually customise, say, the copyright release associated with edits. Changing that is A Good Thing.
On 11 August 2015 at 12:29, Luis Villa <lvi...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 11:43 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> We currently have editable pages on Wikimedia sites with important legal >> strings, and AFAIK no one has caused a noteworthy incident by editing or >> vandalizing them. > > > There are several cases that I'm aware of where legally-significant text > was edited in legally-meaningful ways for varying lengths of time, ranging > from hours to (in some cases) months. Without going into details, for > example, one edit made us non-compliant with California law in a way that > had opened up other large websites to large fines. Thankfully none of them > have been used against us, that I know of, so perhaps locking them down > would be a case of premature optimization. > > Luis > > -- > Luis Villa > Sr. Director of Community Engagement > Wikimedia Foundation > *Working towards a world in which every single human being can freely share > in the sum of all knowledge.* > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l -- Oliver Keyes Count Logula Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
