[PD] pdpedia and spam

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

I do have ssh access to the wiki server and would be happy to make any  
changes that people agree upon.  I am currently running another  
mediawiki for Firmata (http://firmata.org).  When the spambots started  
slamming it, I switched it so only logged in users could edit it, but  
then created a public account and posted that username and password on  
the wiki itself, see the bottom of this: http://firmata.org/wiki/Main_Page 
   Now there is no more spam.

Ideally that public account would be posted on the login page so its  
easy to find.  This system was used in the http://barcamp.org wiki for  
many years and worked there.

.hc

> no, sorry, it's not me, it's still hans. I don't even know on which  
> server it is hosted at the moment. I don't mind taking  
> responsibility but I am very much in favor of a read only version  
> with restricted write access, like Mr Monk.
> marius.

On Oct 18, 2009, at 2:13 PM, marius schebella wrote:

> Philip Potter wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> thanks for your feedback. Based on the response, it doesn't seem  
>> worth
>> it clearing the spam up by hand, but there have been some interesting
>> suggestions for how to maintain pdpedia as a going concern. AFAIK I  
>> am
>> unable to install captchas or make the wiki readonly (or editable by
>> logged-in users only); I think the wiki owner would need to do any of
>> these, if they desired.
>> Does anyone know who is ultimately responsible for the wiki? I guess
>> it's Marius, but I'm not sure.
>
>
>> My preferred option would be to make the whole wiki semiprotected --
>> ie only editable by logged-in users. Captchas would also be a
>> reasonable option.
>> Philip
>> 2009/10/17 Marvin Humphrey <marvin at rectangular.com>:
>>> On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 03:59:03PM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
>>>
>>>> why wouldn't it be better to just have no wiki at all,
>>> Maybe it would be better to kill it off, I dunno.
>>>
>>> If you're gonna do that, though, either remove it completely or  
>>> preserve it as
>>> a read-only resource.  Don't leave the rotting carcass lying  
>>> around for
>>> spammer maggots to feast on.
>>>
>>>> even in a situation where there wouldn't be any spam and the  
>>>> captcha
>>>> wouldn't be annoying?
>>> I don't think spammers ought to be driving the decision when there  
>>> are
>>> countermeasures available.  If the wiki is underused or outdated  
>>> or whatever,
>>> do something to address that, such as retiring it.  But if it's  
>>> being used and
>>> the problem is the spam-to-edit ratio, captchas, whatever their  
>>> drawbacks, can
>>> treat the spammer pestilence and let the wiki live on to die a  
>>> natural death
>>> at the end of its natural lifespan.
>>>
>>> Marvin Humphrey
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list



----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Making boring techno music is really easy with modern tools," he
says, "but with live coding, boring techno is much harder." - Chris  
McCormick