Eugen Leitl wrote:

...

Wikipedia already needs this sort of thing because of AOL IPs -- they have similar characteristics to Tor, in that a single IP produces lots of behavior, some good some bad.

So Wikipedia understands that the transport layer isn't to blame, yet they persist in asking for changes in the Tor transport to address the problem of malicious users? *groan*

Actually, the transport layer *is* to blame. I don't know how much more clear I can be about it. Because Tor users are almost universally bad, because almost no good edits come out of the Tor network, we block them. Why is it that Tor users are so bad? The main reason is that the anonymity provides them with cover. AOL users are sort of bad, but not universally bad. Why is that? It is in part because of the way their transport layer is designed.

That's not the perception they need to change. They need to realize that if an avenue for action without responsibility exists, someone will use it.

We *do* realize that. That's exactly what I'm talking about. Tor provides an avenue for action without responsibility, and people do use it.

Wikis get defaced all the time *without* AOL or Tor, because the philosophy allows anyone to edit. It is that philosophy that is in error, not the transport layers used by the vandals.

If what you're saying is "I think it is fine for Wikipedia to block Tor," then you really aren't contributing productively to this conversation. There are some facts we know: we can usefully reduce the amount of anonymous grief we get by blocking Tor exit servers. So, this is what we are currently doing. I consider this unfortunate, but there you go. We are not looking for a perfect solution. Yes, Wikis will be vandalized. We're prepared to deal with that, we do deal with that. But what I am seeking is some efforts to think usefully about how to helpfully reconcile our dual goals of openness and privacy. I don't say "privacy is wrong, so Tor should change their philosophy". I make no apologies for simply ignoring you if you say that "openness is wrong, so Wikipedia should change their philosophy."

Roger gets it. The Wikipedians don't.

What is it that we don't get? This thread started off because a Tor server complained to me about the blocking, and part of my response is that one beef I have is that some people in the Tor community seem very happy to simply stick their heads in the sand and pretend that "Wikipedians don't get it". That's not helpful. --Jimbo ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]