Re: Our Wiki just got hijacked

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Wed Jun 30 2004 - 00:27:59 CDT

At 3:39 PM -0400 6/29/04, David Mertz wrote:
>On Jun 29, 2004, at 3:28 PM, Popkin, Laird (WMG Corp) wrote:
>>Do we have a concensus on this? I'm happy setting up whatever we want...
>I prefer "(1) Leave it as is" the most.
>My second choice would be "(2) Add HTTP authentication" This would
>deal with the spammers/vandals, and we could publish the password
>(say OVC/OVC) widely, but not in a way accessible to bots.

Then the casual reader would be blocked out. To me, enabling the
casual reader is more important than whether some anonymous person
can edit the Wiki. If the password is published widely enough to
allow readers, then it's published widely enough to permit vandals.

>In my mind, "(3) Access control" comes in a VERY distant third.
>It's very close to being an anti-Wiki.
>In any case, definitely don't setup (3) on I
>want to leave that as a real Wiki either way. If it's use is
>deserted, there's not much I can do... but at least the resource can
>remain available for open participation.

The two VPs of the OVC have recommended against (1).

Best regards,

Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
Received on Wed Jun 30 23:17:28 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jun 30 2004 - 23:17:30 CDT