ico@email-addr-hidden wrote:
>
>>> I know for sure that this particular thing bothers only you
>> ;), not so sure.
>>
>> The problem is, I don't believe in a documentation system where you
>> have to register; I've seen too many that gets updated so very
>> infrequent.
I don't believe that registration is a deterrent to contribution.
> And I do appreciate your stance. However, please note that your statements have
> provided plenty of "I"s, but no "We"s. Hence, I would like to hear what others
> have to say about this.
I think it's a no-brainer that the wiki must be configured so that
people have to register. What's hard about registering? You do it once,
firefox takes care of your password and your done.
We have several wikis where we did not have registration and graffiti
was horrible. With registration, it's manageable. (right, you still get it!)
>> My answer was that the user does this himself. Each time the user
>> visits the wiki, if there is spam there, he reverts it to a previous
>> revision.
Why have this mess in the first place? The admin will have enough
problems and the users should be in the position of adding content, not
fixing problems.
>> We can have a feed, like Fugal, that notifies us of updates; if
>> someone spams we'll know immediately, but nevertheless, a user is
>> fully capable of reverting to a previous revision; it's not like a
>> wiki is unknown territory.
>
> My inbox is alredy a mess. The last thing I need is another mess waiting to
> happen to flood my inbox asking extra time from me which I already have too
> little of. The only reason I am replying to this topic so verbosely is because:
>
> 1) I am very much interested in this particular topic and
> 2) it is the end of semester here and I can actually afford to reply
>
> Again, if you volunteer to maintain this overhead (either by organizing a
> dedicated 0-day response team who will manage this or whichever other way you
> wish to do that in order to ensure that the University server does not host
> Viagra adds and other messages of questionable nature), I will gladly provide
> space for such a Wiki. "Users will take care of it" does not cut it in the real
> world because:
>
> 1) It creates a paradoxal situation where no one is responsible for misuse,
> meaning linuxaudio.org will be responsible and subsequently may lose its right
> to be hosted by a University for free
> 2) Does not guarrantee 0-day response
agreed. Also, you'll get more than Viagra ads!
> Both of these points can be summarized to "the model yields no structure one can
> uphold when facing circumstances which require accountability."
>
>> There should be no reason to maintain a wiki in the common sense, as
>> far as I believe.
>>
>>> on behalf of linuxaudio.org I am inclined to make an offer to the
>>> Linux audio community that favors majority
>> I understand your position, but also understand my disbelief. I can
>> understand that people don't want spam, but I only see less
>> contributors with such a scheme.
Again, I don't think registering will deter those who want to
contribute. On the flip side, w/o registering opens up a whole lot of
potential vandalism.
>>> I can almost guarantee it that Wikipedia will decline a full-blown
>>> documentation page simply because Linux audio software, just as any other
>>> software is a moving target which may radically change, making
>> documentation
>>> outdated, and/or become deprecated, making respective wiki pages obsolete,
>>> and as such should not be a part of an online encyclopedia.
>> I'm not so sure about my stance on wikipedia and I'd like to hear what
>> other people feel. I know that I will back such an effort if people
>> want it and of course, contribute.
I don't know why wikipedia would deny the proposal because of
information changing. Why don't we ask them.
Wikipedia is a great place to do this because of it's visibility.
>>> as long as we propose fragmentation of the humble Linux audio scene
>>> because of our hard-line stands/preferences [..] we will be spending
>>> immense amounts of time and effort reinventing the wheel.
>> It's more a fact. If you make a registration required wiki, someone
>> WILL make a non registration required wiki.
I don't know why. however, if that's the case, that's ok. One will win
out. And, if two or three do, it'll be because they offer the people
slightly different value.
>
> Again, fine. If that is what the community wants, we shall have it. I've made
> my proposal under the terms which were the best I could offer. My proposal is
> non-coercive nor definite, it is simply the best what linuxaudio.org could
> offer. Now, it is up to you and the rest of the community to decide what you
> wish to do about this.
>
brad fuller
http://www.Sonaural.com/
+1 (408) 799-6124
Received on Sat Dec 16 04:15:03 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Dec 16 2006 - 04:15:03 EET