You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to docs@httpd.apache.org by Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com> on 2013/01/09 14:11:08 UTC
lock down wiki?
I don't know what technology choices we have, but should we lock down
the wiki and require accounts/approval? I don't think we'll be
getting in anyones way and will save us from processing the regular
spam.
The few valuable contributions we're seeing are from e.g. committers
or "regulars" from some support forum or another.
--
Eric Covener
covener@gmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: lock down wiki?
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On Jan 9, 2013, at 8:11 AM, Eric Covener wrote:
> I don't know what technology choices we have, but should we lock down
> the wiki and require accounts/approval? I don't think we'll be
> getting in anyones way and will save us from processing the regular
> spam.
>
> The few valuable contributions we're seeing are from e.g. committers
> or "regulars" from some support forum or another.
Reluctantly +1. I hate the way spammers ruin everything. :(
We need to have a VERY low bar to entry, and it should be well documented, so that any time someone clicks edit they have something in their face telling them how to request edit permission.
--
Rich Bowen
rbowen@rcbowen.com
Shosholoza
Re: lock down wiki?
Posted by Nick Kew <ni...@webthing.com>.
On Wed, 9 Jan 2013 08:11:08 -0500
Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't know what technology choices we have, but should we lock down
> the wiki and require accounts/approval? I don't think we'll be
> getting in anyones way and will save us from processing the regular
> spam.
>
> The few valuable contributions we're seeing are from e.g. committers
> or "regulars" from some support forum or another.
+1
Though with this as with other ASF resources, it would be
great to gave it auto-approve anyone coming from an @a.o
address.
--
Nick Kew
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: lock down wiki?
Posted by Igor Galić <i....@brainsware.org>.
----- Original Message -----
> I don't know what technology choices we have, but should we lock down
> the wiki and require accounts/approval? I don't think we'll be
> getting in anyones way and will save us from processing the regular
> spam.
>
> The few valuable contributions we're seeing are from e.g. committers
> or "regulars" from some support forum or another.
Most of our wikis are protected via a whitelist of contributors:
e.g.: http://wiki.apache.org/apachecon/ContributorsGroup
I'm generally +1
> --
> Eric Covener
> covener@gmail.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
>
>
--
Igor Galić
Tel: +43 (0) 664 886 22 883
Mail: i.galic@brainsware.org
URL: http://brainsware.org/
GPG: 6880 4155 74BD FD7C B515 2EA5 4B1D 9E08 A097 C9AE
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: lock down wiki?
Posted by Daniel Ruggeri <DR...@primary.net>.
On 1/9/2013 7:11 AM, Eric Covener wrote:
> I don't know what technology choices we have, but should we lock down
> the wiki and require accounts/approval? I don't think we'll be
> getting in anyones way and will save us from processing the regular
> spam.
>
> The few valuable contributions we're seeing are from e.g. committers
> or "regulars" from some support forum or another.
I'm +1 to this idea because of the great docs comment system. Without
it, the idea of locking the wiki down would be much less palatable.
--
Daniel Ruggeri
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: lock down wiki?
Posted by Nick Kew <ni...@webthing.com>.
On Wed, 9 Jan 2013 19:42:58 +0000
Tim Bannister <is...@jellybaby.net> wrote:
> How about a better CAPTCHA rather than approval?
Not one of those nasty eyesight tests!
For "is this a human", let them parse
"what is four plus 7 - 2" ?
Hmmm, I see there's now a question implying knowledge
that a reader might have to look up: that's jumping
through hoops that might deter some genuine contributors.
And how many spellings/etc does it accept?
--
Nick Kew
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: lock down wiki?
Posted by Nick Kew <ni...@webthing.com>.
On Wed, 9 Jan 2013 19:42:58 +0000
Tim Bannister <is...@jellybaby.net> wrote:
> If anyone knows a wiki that lets people /propose/ edits without filling in a CAPTCHA, that might be enough. It should reduce spam because the spammers have little to gain from proposing a spam edit.
Most spammers are bots. They don't know or care that
their edit isn't going to go 'live'.
--
Nick Kew
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: lock down wiki?
Posted by Tim Bannister <is...@jellybaby.net>.
On 9 Jan 2013, at 13:11, Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't know what technology choices we have, but should we lock down the wiki and require accounts/approval? I don't think we'll be getting in anyones way and will save us from processing the regular spam.
>
> The few valuable contributions we're seeing are from e.g. committers or "regulars" from some support forum or another.
I'm one of the people that Rich Bowen doesn't want to deter. I haven't added much but I've made some small edits that I hope have been useful improvements.
How about a better CAPTCHA rather than approval? One thing that might happen (and has happened to other wikis) is that the deletion workload is replaced by an account rejection workload. In fact, given that most spam is on nonsense user pages the difference might be pretty small.
I realise that:
• a good CAPTCHA is more work to set up
• spammers can and do get past CAPTCHAs
• it's still a barrier to contributions
If anyone knows a wiki that lets people /propose/ edits without filling in a CAPTCHA, that might be enough. It should reduce spam because the spammers have little to gain from proposing a spam edit.
--
Tim Bannister – isoma@jellybaby.net