QUOTE(WhispersOfWisdom @ Wed 21st November 2007, 7:02pm)
Banning is totally useless with dynamic IP addresses; ability to change names, information, and preferences.
Not necessarily. People 'do' have a 'voice' and especially when someone has a certain topic they like to edit, (esp if they were kicked off for being NPOV), they can be sussed out. Durova tries to do this, but she is especially ham handed at it, mostly because she's in a huge hurry to be 'right', so she cuts out a few crucial steps which might have determined that the person was not who she guessed. That's her idea of a complex investigation, in a nutshell. I don't know why she wants it to be a 'secret recipe'. It is obviously not using anything technically special.
Wikipedia could also use mac address identification (your hard drive or network card(s) id number) but that is a bit hardcore. Usually the FBI or authorities use this, to find pedophiles or fraudsters or other criminals (like hackers or writers of bigscale viruses - they used this to find the Melissa virus author). If Wikipedia did use this, and became known for it, it could cause them problems (though it would be hard to prove as most things are). Mac addresses can be spoofed, but is not widely done, takes some special tools, etc. Mac addresses can be changed, but that takes some expertise. Having said that, many vandals on Wikipedia are sysadmins, and could do such things quite easily (track mac addresses, spoof mac addresses, and change mac addresses). Then there is the whole ipv6 area, which I am not entirely clear on, which might be used for tracking.
Even if they id'd people, like Ebay does, that can be got around. I've switched ebay accounts, mostly due to getting three strikes from three sellers in outer Mongolia deciding that I didnt send them 5 dollars for a t-shirt, and making an unpaid bidder complaint, and not reading my emails, so after 500 honest buys, I am blocked. Last time that happened, I had a work crisis, and when I had time, it was months later, and I didnt feel like devoting 6 hours to clearing my name, so I created a new email, added a new credit card for verification, and basta, I was shopping again. I've done that twice in 8 years. And if I can do that when ebay requires bank and credit card information, Wikipedia has a long row to hoe if they want to correctly id all users.
QUOTE(WhispersOfWisdom @ Wed 21st November 2007, 7:02pm)
Is everyone on the honor system to not use a different account? No, they all have different user accounts which, of course, is legal.
Well, yes and no. Yes, if you have a powerful place in Wikipedia. If not, some wacko like Durova might accuse you of socking, and prove you have two logins, and then make a case for bad socking, based on nothing. Which makes no sense, since lots of admins have socks. But that's how it works.
QUOTE(WhispersOfWisdom @ Wed 21st November 2007, 7:02pm)
It is no different than MySpace. That is the thrust of my original thesis pertaining to the deletion of my real name at WP. The fact that anyone could come along and claim they are me as they do on MySpace is really kind of scary. Then I couldn't even get into the account to alter it. Then it was protected. I wrote to Jimmy Wales on at least 3 occasions about the potential liability involved with real people. My counsel takes care of these things.
See my last comment on kicked and screaming and then behaving correctly and pretending that they always were good. The law isn't very well applied in this area. Yet.
QUOTE(WhispersOfWisdom @ Wed 21st November 2007, 7:02pm)
a.) I do not want an article. b.) I do not want to use my real name where people can and do change things about my life that may or may not be accurate. That includes things about my family. Until they have a means of detecting vandalism right away, it will always present as a problem for any biography of real people.
Even afterwards, articles are problematic. A People Magazine article is a static thing. A Wikipedia article is a realtime element, which must be monitored constantly. Also, the Wikipedia thing is 'live' forever, whereas a newspaper or print article comes and goes. Even website libel isn't as grave, since it doesn't have the google standing that Wikipedia does.
QUOTE(WhispersOfWisdom @ Wed 21st November 2007, 7:02pm)
Durova can start over with a whole new name. I can go there anytime from anywhere in the world and have fun. I could be 50 different people...right? (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif)
Or you could go anwhere in the world with Durova, under a whole new name, and 50 other people would have more fun than you (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif)
QUOTE(WhispersOfWisdom @ Wed 21st November 2007, 7:02pm)
If WP ever freezes articles and develops a real hierarchy of management like a corporation, the place will be bought. Yep.
Lots of corporate behavior is pretty dysfunctional too. The difference is that most corporations have limits and are very well aware of legal liabilities. Successful corporations also are customer focused, as a means of profit maximization. Wikipedia could be so, but their definition of 'what is a customer' is never made clear (or communicated to users), therefore the concept of pleasing customers is non-existant (and is 'why' they keep pissing off important corporations, persons, etc), and customer relations is such a complete mess. Given that so many kids work there, who really need to be instructed and 'trained' as such, the lack of corporate message, (and I dont mean the few existing Jimbo platitudes,like 'we make the internet not suck' or 'sum of all human knowledge') causes a vaccuum which is filled by self-seeking selfish human behavior.
Wikipedia has been a huge success to date not because of the corporate structure or organization, but because so many people want to be part of something important. It is a software-driven success, and a concept-driven success. Unfortunately, the focus on being important (over substance and form) has outweighed other, very important, things (like substance and form), resulting in many problems, that will only get worse.
This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey: 
Oops, Durova's Mea culpa
