[Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
118 messages Options
123456
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

Pine W
Lila,

I hope you are aware of the issues being described in this thread. Would
you please state your views on this situation?

Pine
On Aug 10, 2014 6:09 PM, "Tomasz W. Kozłowski" <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> On 11 August 2014 01:05, John Lewis wrote:
>
> > The people who were actually responsible were the community. Erik was
> > acting in a preventative role to prevent further disruption not punish
> > administrators.
>
> Erik was acting in a manner that is totally disgraceful. He should
> have never used his force to revert DaB.  The way that DaB.
> "implemented" the results of that RfC were incorrect, and the
> community of the German Wikipedia were perfectly able to revert his
> edits themselves once they realized what the effects were — without
> the need to involve the WMF at any point.
>
> > * A new user right to prevent disruption
>
> Implemented without any community consultation whatsoever, on a global
> scale even though the problem was occurring only on the German
> Wikipedia.
>
> > * A user has been desysoped by the community for no reason on dewiki
>
> Nothing of the sort has happened yet.
>
> > And who are we blaming? Erik. Why? Because we are a bunch of stubborn
> > children. We don't get what we want so we are kicking and screaming to
> get
> > it but in the end; we don't and we then accuse our parent (WMF) of being
> > too harsh, mean and taking away something we like but do not deserve.
>
> The only person that should be blamed by what happened is Erik. He is
> a WMF employee, he is an experienced Wikimedian, and he should have
> realized what would be the result of his actions.
>
> Instead, he went ahead with his show of force, and escalated a
> situation that would have fixed itself in a matter of hours.
>
> Even if MMV was disabled for a day, nothing would have happened. Now
> shit's happened, and it will be damn hard to regain the trust that was
> lost over this absurd stretching of muscles.
>
> PS For what it's worth: I like MultimediaViewer. I use it, and I
> opposed the idea that a small community of volunteers can decide to
> disable it for anonymous editors. But what Erik has done is totally
> unacceptable, and contrary to the supposed cooperation between the WMF
> and the volunteer communities.
>
> --
>                 Tomasz
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

Peter Southwood
In reply to this post by John Lewis
EXACTLY Who is this "community" of which we speak so glibly?
Herein lies a large part of the problem. A few people claim to represent the many, based on "consensus" derived from a tiny sample. There is no one community, there are several, depending on who wants to make a point.
Clique may be a better description in many cases.
Peter Southwood.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of John Lewis
Sent: 11 August 2014 01:05 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

The people who were actually responsible were the community. Erik was acting in a preventative role to prevent further disruption not punish administrators. The community. couldn't take no for an answer and what has happened?

* Wheel/edit wars
* A new user right to prevent disruption
* A priviledge has been revoked on dewiki
* A user has been desysoped by the community for no reason on dewiki

And who are we blaming? Erik. Why? Because we are a bunch of stubborn children. We don't get what we want so we are kicking and screaming to get it but in the end; we don't and we then accuse our parent (WMF) of being too harsh, mean and taking away something we like but do not deserve.

To be honest - until we as a community learn we are not the overlords, the masters, god of Wikimedia, we can work to building a real encyclopedia with awesome feature where are all work in a good environment and get on as a community and Foundation.

I am not saying the WMF is perfect and is not in the wrong; they certainly have some blame to take and I will come onto that shortly, but we can not blame the Foundation for revoking something we clearly do not deserve.

>
Erik, While I will say you have not been communicating stuff the best you can and this new user right was proxy deployed by Tim and an advocate and not your self - you mean well and I see this. I agree with everything you have done so far as a matter of fact.

Fabrice, Have you attempted to start any discussions with communities in exactly why they don't want Media Viewer and how exactly it causes so much dispute that it requires Erik to proxy intervene? It not, please do so.

In a short conclusion - I feel both parties have acted inappropriately and our bitching at each other does far than solve it. The WMF had to implement a new right and revoke dewiki's access to their site wide js page because of their refusal to accept what the WMF said and want to create a performance killer hack to 'fix it' at the cost of performance. Why did dewiki have to do this? The WMF refusing to disable Media Viewer. From what I see, the WMF have backed up by they refused to do this for Wikipedias and their compromise for Commons is acceptable. I have yet to see a valid reason why Media Viewer exactly makes Wikipedia go into a 'OMG UNUSABLE DISABLE IT FUCKING NOW OR I WILL' state. Media Viewer allows you to view and images without leaving the page - reducing load time for both users and the WMF. It is hardly the beginning if the end for images.

If we take a quick look at the statistics - 64 voted against Media Viewer on the English Wikipedia while 6kish users enabled it, this shows 1.1% consensus for disabling the extension in a whole.

I will not ramble on any more. I just ask the community to stop bitching at the WMF and accept their decision. Until then - I fully support Erik super protecting every single js and CSS page on every wiki as most Sysop I feel are technically incompetent.

John Lewis



--
John Lewis
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4744 / Virus Database: 4007/8014 - Release Date: 08/11/14


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

svetlana
In reply to this post by Tomasz W. Kozłowski-2
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014, at 08:42, Tomasz W. Kozłowski wrote:
> Someone is definitely forgetting that Wikimedia wikis are not the
> Foundation's personal playground.

It is becoming one for a long time now.

svetlana

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikipedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

Kim Bruning
In reply to this post by K. Peachey-2

Ha, you'd think so! ;-)

In reality so far, the only known application was to lock the common.js
at de.wikipedia, to prevent some crazy admin(s) from breaking the wiki.


Which incidentally shows that "will not break the wiki" really IS the
minimal admin criterion, and is not trivial at all }:-)

sincerely,
        Kim

On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 11:19:27PM +1000, K. Peachey wrote:

> Lets all welcome the new overlord Erik.
>
> Add a new protection level called "superprotect"
> Assigned to nobody by default. Requested by Erik M??ller for the purposes
> of protecting pages such that sysop permissions are not sufficient to
>
>
> edit them.
> Change-Id: Idfa211257dbacc7623d42393257de1525ff01e9e
> <https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#q,Idfa211257dbacc7623d42393257de1525ff01e9e,n,z>
>
> https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/153302/
>
>
>
> Someone clearly can't take criticism of their projects well.

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

Fæ
In reply to this post by K. Peachey-2
On 11 August 2014 03:19, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Lila,
>
> I hope you are aware of the issues being described in this thread. Would
> you please state your views on this situation?
>
> Pine

+1 It would be great to hear from Lila on the current decisions being
taken by her employees.

The discussion on this has now involved threats to take serious action
on both "sides". I find the idea of blocking dissenting voices
repugnant and fundamentally against the Community value of openness
and transparency. Dissent is not the same thing as disruption or being
uncivil, I think the lines are becoming dangerously blurred in this
area and we are in danger of seeing a super stupid dramafest being
fuelled.

For what it's worth, anyone with admin powers that starts blocking
people would be a major wally, and might take care to consider the
potential "boomerang" effects that are likely to undo anything
positive they hope to achieve. On my favourite friendly Wikimedia
project, Commons, we have the concept of staying mellow, even when
dealing with seriously difficult discussion, so keep it mellow. I will
skip reading emails here that look ranty, life's too short.

Cheers,
Fae
--
[hidden email] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

Comet styles
In reply to this post by svetlana
Erik, I wonder, did you have discussion with other staff and moreso,
the technical staff before you went ahead and implemented this and
also something most of us are wondering, just because dewiki did not
accept your "enforcement" of MediaViewer, did you abuse your authority
and force the technical staff to create this new permission
(superprotect) so that you can override a community's decision..a
permission which currently only the staff have access to?

Seems a bit dictator-like...


your comments above is just not reasonable enough..

On 8/11/14, svetlana <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Mon, 11 Aug 2014, at 08:42, Tomasz W. Kozłowski wrote:
>> Someone is definitely forgetting that Wikimedia wikis are not the
>> Foundation's personal playground.
>
> It is becoming one for a long time now.
>
> svetlana
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>


--
Cometstyles

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikipedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

Todd Allen
In reply to this post by Kim Bruning
On Aug 11, 2014 7:11 AM, "Kim Bruning" <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> Ha, you'd think so! ;-)
>
> In reality so far, the only known application was to lock the common.js
> at de.wikipedia, to prevent some crazy admin(s) from breaking the wiki.
>
>
> Which incidentally shows that "will not break the wiki" really IS the
> minimal admin criterion, and is not trivial at all }:-)
>
> sincerely,
>         Kim
>
> On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 11:19:27PM +1000, K. Peachey wrote:
> > Lets all welcome the new overlord Erik.
> >
> > Add a new protection level called "superprotect"
> > Assigned to nobody by default. Requested by Erik M??ller for the
purposes
> > of protecting pages such that sysop permissions are not sufficient to
> >
> >
> > edit them.
> > Change-Id: Idfa211257dbacc7623d42393257de1525ff01e9e
> > <
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#q,Idfa211257dbacc7623d42393257de1525ff01e9e,n,z

>
> >
> > https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/153302/
> >
> >
> >
> > Someone clearly can't take criticism of their projects well.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>

No one "broke the wiki" by disabling unwanted functions following a clear
consensus. True breaking changes to those pages would be reverted by other
admins before you could blink.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

John Mark Vandenberg
In reply to this post by Erik Moeller-4
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 12:18 AM, Brian Wolff <[hidden email]> wrote:

>>
>> Now, having observed that not only user Eloquence (aka Erik Moeller)
>> himself engaged in the enforcement of  <superprotect> right on de.wp
>> [1] but soon after a workaround was published a change was deployed
>> [2, 3] as counter measurement to block any possible interference can
>> no longer be interpret as acting in good faith but rather strikes me
>> as a form of oppression (or worst as censorship).
>>
>
> [Putting the purely mw dev hat on]
>
> It was a bug in mediawiki, and thus it should be fixed. MediaWiki is used
> by many different groups and in general we [mw devs] do not judge people
> for how they use the software. If some non wmf entity reported the bug, it
> would still be fixed.
>
> So dont complain that mw fixes a bug in how page protection. If you are
> unhappy with current events you should direct your anger at how the wmf
> decided to use hard security to enforce its dictates, not at the software
> for "working".

Sorry Brian, which bug are you referring to?  Could you point me to a
bug report?

Before this, there was no expectation that a page could be protected
such that sysops could not alter the content of the superprotected
page.

Now, the devs/ops have attempted to introduce that capability, and the
new functionality is very likely riddled with holes, some of which
MZMcBride has suggested in the thread 'Options for the German
Wikipedia'.

Moreover the deployed technical change is useless due to design flaws.
What was the goal of this change?  Was it to prevent sysops injecting
JavaScript that logged out user-agents execute?  If that is the
use-case, this patch is a very weak solution from an engineering
perspective.  It was rushed it into a production environment, and
needed a follow up patch almost immediately.  And the bug reports for
this new functionality will surely roll in.

These patches only make it 'forbidden' to deactivate the MediaViewer.
They don't prevent it.  These patches only introduce a new policy,
signalling a new era, and make it technically more challenging to
bypass that new policy.  The policy written says "Sysops are not
allowed to inject JavaScript into the reader's user-agent which
interferes with WMF's favoured features."  It is still possible, but
the only thing that is stopping de.wp sysops from deactivating the
MediaViewer some other way is that the WMF has demonstrated it will
make drastic changes to the MediaWiki configuration to take away
capabilities from their community.  Should the community work-around
this change, they are fairly confident that the WMF will desysop
whoeverdoes it, or more configuration changes and superprotection will
occur.

--
John Vandenberg

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

Todd Allen
And what happens when said admin is overwhelmingly reelected by the
community?

This is not the way forward. WMF can't continue to treat its volunteers in
this manner.
On Aug 11, 2014 12:01 PM, "John Mark Vandenberg" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 12:18 AM, Brian Wolff <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Now, having observed that not only user Eloquence (aka Erik Moeller)
> >> himself engaged in the enforcement of  <superprotect> right on de.wp
> >> [1] but soon after a workaround was published a change was deployed
> >> [2, 3] as counter measurement to block any possible interference can
> >> no longer be interpret as acting in good faith but rather strikes me
> >> as a form of oppression (or worst as censorship).
> >>
> >
> > [Putting the purely mw dev hat on]
> >
> > It was a bug in mediawiki, and thus it should be fixed. MediaWiki is used
> > by many different groups and in general we [mw devs] do not judge people
> > for how they use the software. If some non wmf entity reported the bug,
> it
> > would still be fixed.
> >
> > So dont complain that mw fixes a bug in how page protection. If you are
> > unhappy with current events you should direct your anger at how the wmf
> > decided to use hard security to enforce its dictates, not at the software
> > for "working".
>
> Sorry Brian, which bug are you referring to?  Could you point me to a
> bug report?
>
> Before this, there was no expectation that a page could be protected
> such that sysops could not alter the content of the superprotected
> page.
>
> Now, the devs/ops have attempted to introduce that capability, and the
> new functionality is very likely riddled with holes, some of which
> MZMcBride has suggested in the thread 'Options for the German
> Wikipedia'.
>
> Moreover the deployed technical change is useless due to design flaws.
> What was the goal of this change?  Was it to prevent sysops injecting
> JavaScript that logged out user-agents execute?  If that is the
> use-case, this patch is a very weak solution from an engineering
> perspective.  It was rushed it into a production environment, and
> needed a follow up patch almost immediately.  And the bug reports for
> this new functionality will surely roll in.
>
> These patches only make it 'forbidden' to deactivate the MediaViewer.
> They don't prevent it.  These patches only introduce a new policy,
> signalling a new era, and make it technically more challenging to
> bypass that new policy.  The policy written says "Sysops are not
> allowed to inject JavaScript into the reader's user-agent which
> interferes with WMF's favoured features."  It is still possible, but
> the only thing that is stopping de.wp sysops from deactivating the
> MediaViewer some other way is that the WMF has demonstrated it will
> make drastic changes to the MediaWiki configuration to take away
> capabilities from their community.  Should the community work-around
> this change, they are fairly confident that the WMF will desysop
> whoeverdoes it, or more configuration changes and superprotection will
> occur.
>
> --
> John Vandenberg
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
In reply to this post by John Mark Vandenberg
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 2:01 PM, John Mark Vandenberg <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Before this, there was no expectation that a page could be protected
> such that sysops could not alter the content of the superprotected
> page.
>

This is false.


> Now, the devs/ops have attempted to introduce that capability, and the
> new functionality is very likely riddled with holes, some of which
> MZMcBride has suggested in the thread 'Options for the German
> Wikipedia'.
>

Most of what MZMcBride posted there has nothing to do with actually
breaking superprotection. Editing a page that isn't superprotected isn't a
break in the protection feature itself, for example. Nor is hacking
people's accounts.


--
Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
Software Engineer
Wikimedia Foundation
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

John Mark Vandenberg
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 3:49 AM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 2:01 PM, John Mark Vandenberg <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Before this, there was no expectation that a page could be protected
>> such that sysops could not alter the content of the superprotected
>> page.
>>
>
> This is false.

Care to explain?

Was this functionality was ever supported by MediaWiki core?
Could you point me towards some documentation?

>> Now, the devs/ops have attempted to introduce that capability, and the
>> new functionality is very likely riddled with holes, some of which
>> MZMcBride has suggested in the thread 'Options for the German
>> Wikipedia'.
>>
>
> Most of what MZMcBride posted there has nothing to do with actually
> breaking superprotection. Editing a page that isn't superprotected isn't a
> break in the protection feature itself, for example.

Of course it is.  It isnt a 'feature' until it actually works at the
released product level.
Rushing component level hardening changes into production, when
everyone knows how to work around the new 'hardened' code, it very bad
change management.
It likely introduces unforeseen bugs, for no actual gain.

--
John Vandenberg

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

Tim Starling-2
In reply to this post by Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
On 11/08/14 21:49, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 2:01 PM, John Mark Vandenberg <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>> Now, the devs/ops have attempted to introduce that capability, and the
>> new functionality is very likely riddled with holes, some of which
>> MZMcBride has suggested in the thread 'Options for the German
>> Wikipedia'.
>>
>
> Most of what MZMcBride posted there has nothing to do with actually
> breaking superprotection. Editing a page that isn't superprotected isn't a
> break in the protection feature itself, for example. Nor is hacking
> people's accounts.

Right, we (devs) weren't asked to prevent admins from disabling
MediaViewer, we were only asked to make it possible to protect pages
in the MediaWiki namespace such that ordinary admins couldn't edit
them. I understood the feature request as introducing a more gradual
escalation path, it wasn't an attempt to directly achieve a particular
goal.

John Mark Vandenberg wrote:
>> These patches only introduce a new policy,
>> signalling a new era, and make it technically more challenging to
>> bypass that new policy.  The policy written says "Sysops are not
>> allowed to inject JavaScript into the reader's user-agent which
>> interferes with WMF's favoured features."

Erik was very clear about this policy change in his first email to
this thread.

-- Tim Starling


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

Todd Allen
Tim, I don't believe the issue was a failure to be clear. The problem is
the content of the change and its heavy handed enforcement.

Super protection either should not exist, or like suppression, it should be
used only by stewards and community approved functionaries.
On Aug 11, 2014 5:49 PM, "Tim Starling" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 11/08/14 21:49, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 2:01 PM, John Mark Vandenberg <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >> Now, the devs/ops have attempted to introduce that capability, and the
> >> new functionality is very likely riddled with holes, some of which
> >> MZMcBride has suggested in the thread 'Options for the German
> >> Wikipedia'.
> >>
> >
> > Most of what MZMcBride posted there has nothing to do with actually
> > breaking superprotection. Editing a page that isn't superprotected isn't
> a
> > break in the protection feature itself, for example. Nor is hacking
> > people's accounts.
>
> Right, we (devs) weren't asked to prevent admins from disabling
> MediaViewer, we were only asked to make it possible to protect pages
> in the MediaWiki namespace such that ordinary admins couldn't edit
> them. I understood the feature request as introducing a more gradual
> escalation path, it wasn't an attempt to directly achieve a particular
> goal.
>
> John Mark Vandenberg wrote:
> >> These patches only introduce a new policy,
> >> signalling a new era, and make it technically more challenging to
> >> bypass that new policy.  The policy written says "Sysops are not
> >> allowed to inject JavaScript into the reader's user-agent which
> >> interferes with WMF's favoured features."
>
> Erik was very clear about this policy change in his first email to
> this thread.
>
> -- Tim Starling
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

svetlana
> On Aug 11, 2014 5:49 PM, "Tim Starling" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On 11/08/14 21:49, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) wrote:
> > John Mark Vandenberg wrote:
> > >> These patches only introduce a new policy,
> > >> signalling a new era, and make it technically more challenging to
> > >> bypass that new policy.  The policy written says "Sysops are not
> > >> allowed to inject JavaScript into the reader's user-agent which
> > >> interferes with WMF's favoured features."
> >
> > Erik was very clear about this policy change in his first email to
> > this thread.
> >
> > -- Tim Starling

On Tue, 12 Aug 2014, at 10:13, Todd Allen wrote:
> Tim, I don't believe the issue was a failure to be clear. The problem is
> the content of the change and its heavy handed enforcement.
>
> Super protection either should not exist, or like suppression, it should be
> used only by stewards and community approved functionaries.

If we accept the policy in principle, I don't care who enforces such policy, that be community or WMF. Such policy does not go against community entirely, unless WMF shows a will to reject community patches related to issues which community finds important. Whether or not this is the case, I don't care; it's a website in their hands and they're welcome to shut it off without notice, or to experiment at leisure.

The time for community to get involved in development, and create all the necessary structures required to support such development, is long overdue.

svetlana

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

Philippe Beaudette-2
In reply to this post by Todd Allen


> On Aug 11, 2014, at 7:13 PM, Todd Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> like suppression, it should be
> used only by stewards and community approved functionaries.


I'm confused. Are you suggesting that suppression is not used by staff?  

Super protection can be used by staff, and was. Suppression can be used by staff as well, and regularly is. (For instance, if legal were to ask me to suppress an edit, under court order). It (suppression) is not a tool we use without careful consideration, but it is one we use. I should think the same would be true of superprotection- it's not to be used lightly but it is a tool in our belt.

Philippe
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

Todd Allen
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 10:13 PM, Philippe Beaudette <
[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> > On Aug 11, 2014, at 7:13 PM, Todd Allen <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > like suppression, it should be
> > used only by stewards and community approved functionaries.
>
>
> I'm confused. Are you suggesting that suppression is not used by staff?
>
> Super protection can be used by staff, and was. Suppression can be used by
> staff as well, and regularly is. (For instance, if legal were to ask me to
> suppress an edit, under court order). It (suppression) is not a tool we use
> without careful consideration, but it is one we use. I should think the
> same would be true of superprotection- it's not to be used lightly but it
> is a tool in our belt.
>
> Philippe
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>


I think we're comparing apples to anvils here. Handling a legal issue using
suppression (or protection, or now superprotection) is a far cry from using
it to resolve a dispute to one's preferred outcome. That is, if nothing
else, a massive expansion of what's normally been acceptable as an Office
action, which have historically (and to my mind, properly) been reserved
for cases that could put us in severe legal jeopardy if not immediately
addressed. Those cases, while rare, are an appropriate use.

Standard full protection along with necessary suppressions, however, along
with clear warnings indicating what's going on, has always been sufficient
to handle those few cases. Superprotection wasn't designed with vanishingly
rare Office legal actions that are already quite adequately handled in
mind, and I think all of us here know that. It's another attempt to force
unwanted changes, because apparently "We'll desysop you for implementing
your community's decisions when we won't!" wasn't quite ham-fisted enough.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

Pine W
In reply to this post by Philippe Beaudette-2
Forwarding comments from Lila from
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ALilaTretikov&diff=9454366&oldid=9339030

All --

Thank you for your comments, criticism, support and advice on software that
you've collected in the RfCs. I agree that we need to improve both our
process and our software. MV is a great feature to use as a testbed for
those improvements. I also believe it represents a good foundation that we
should improve together. We are not going to make any hasty changes, but we
will will get back to you on:

* Next steps (in the next 2-3 weeks)
* Process improvements
* Software changes
* Policy clarification (deployment, RFCs, reverts, etc.)

We love your feedback and your support.

Thank you.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

Pine W
FWIW, Lila's comments were made before the start of this email thread about
superprotect.

Pine


On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 11:53 PM, Pine W <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Forwarding comments from Lila from
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ALilaTretikov&diff=9454366&oldid=9339030
>
> All --
>
> Thank you for your comments, criticism, support and advice on software
> that you've collected in the RfCs. I agree that we need to improve both our
> process and our software. MV is a great feature to use as a testbed for
> those improvements. I also believe it represents a good foundation that we
> should improve together. We are not going to make any hasty changes, but we
> will will get back to you on:
>
> * Next steps (in the next 2-3 weeks)
> * Process improvements
> * Software changes
> * Policy clarification (deployment, RFCs, reverts, etc.)
>
> We love your feedback and your support.
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

Craig Franklin
In reply to this post by Erik Moeller-4
Erik,

I'll be writing a longer post on the Meta RFC later, but can you confirm
whether the idea is to "superprotect" key interface pages like
[[Mediawiki:common.js]] on a permanent basis, or will this feature only be
used to lock pages temporarily in the case of wheel warring or other
circumstances like what happened on de.wp?

Thanks,
Craig Franklin


On 10 August 2014 23:27, Erik Moeller <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> Admins are currently given broad leeway to customize the user
> experience for all users, including addition of site-wide JS, CSS,
> etc. These are important capabilities of the wiki that have been used
> for many clearly beneficial purposes. In the long run, we will want to
> apply a code review process to these changes as with any other
> deployed code, but for now the system works as it is and we have no
> intent to remove this capability.
>
> However, we've clarified in a number of venues that use of the
> MediaWiki: namespace to disable site features is unacceptable. If such
> a conflict arises, we're prepared to revoke permissions if required.
> This protection level provides an additional path to manage these
> situations by preventing edits to the relevant pages (we're happy to
> help apply any urgent edits) until a particular situation has calmed
> down.
>
> Thanks,
> Erik
> --
> Erik Möller
> VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

Pine W
In reply to this post by K. Peachey-2
Straniu, Jimbo's comments in his keynote about forking concerned
encouraging competent editors who can't work cooperatively with other
people to fork in a way that would be better for everyone in the long run.
I don't believe this disappointing  confrontation between the WMF and
volunteers were what Jimbo had in mind.

Pine
On Aug 12, 2014 1:44 AM, "Strainu" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Gerard,
>
> Some answers (in a random order).
>
> 2014-08-11 12:20 GMT+03:00 Gerard Meijssen <[hidden email]>:
> > You know our projects, you know our licenses. If you, the "community"do
> not
> > like what you have, you can fork. At Wikimania forking and leaving the
> > community was very much discussed. Watch Jimbo's presentation for
> instance,
> > he may be aghast that I quote him here but in his state of the Wiki he
> made
> > it abundantly clear that it is your option to stay or go.
>
> I gave up watching Jimbo's keynotes a few years ago, as I would
> invariably get pissed off. So, should we understand that the vast
> ammounts of money and resources spent on editor retention are a waste
> of our money? I sincerely hope this is a heat-of-the-moment argument,
> just like the one about closing de.wp.
>
> > Hoi,
> > Code review should be a strictly technical process surely. However the
> > community CANNOT decide on everything.
>
> Agreed. How about letting the WMF decide for anonymous users and the
> community decide for logged-in users? Presumably, the logged-in users
> have access to a large panel of options and can make up their own mind
> if they disagree with the consensus. Of course, discussions should not
> disappear because of such a separation, but even become more active
> and hopefully less aggressive.
>
>
> > When you are in those conversations you realise that many
> > complications are considered; it is not easy nor obvious.
> > NB there is not one community, there are many with often completely
> > diverging opinions. Technically it is not possible to always keep
> backward
> > compatibility / functionality. We are not backward we need to stay
> > contemporary.
>
> As a software engineer in a publicly traded company, I understand the
> reasoning behind more than 90% of the decisions made by the
> Engineering staff - and this worries me terribly, because they *don't*
> work for a company. Their objectives and approaches should be
> different.
>
> There are three main wiki-use-cases that should receive similar levels
> of attention:
> * reading
> * basic editing
> * advanced editing
>
> The first two receive a lot of love, but the third one not so much,
> it's even hindered by initiatives designed for the first two. I'm not
> saying that we should keep backwards compatibility forever, but since
> the WMF wants to deploy stuff early in order to get feedback, it
> should begin by offering it as a beta (they do that now), then, when
> reaching a decent level of stability, deploy it for anonymous users
> and opt-in users and only when it reaches feature-parity with the
> feature being replaced should it be pushed for everybody (keeping an
> opt-out feature for some time - months or a couple of years).
>
> Take for instance the media viewer: the current version is useless for
> editors, as it has basically no controls visible by default (without
> scrolling). The future version, presented at Wikimania, has a lot more
> stuff visible on the first screen, making it much easier to use for
> editing. I believe that the media viewer should have been kept as
> opt-in for logged in users until this future version arrives.
>
> Strainu
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[hidden email]?subject=unsubscribe>
123456