Forum:Problem at the Oncy

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Index > Help > Problem at the Oncy
Note: This topic has been unedited for 2974 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

(I'm not sure if this is the right forum, if it's moved, please tell me on my discussion page.)

The Oncyclopedia (the Dutch Uncy) is having a celebration soon. We're celebrating our third birthday (btw, you're invited.) We're making huge changes like featuring pictures and OnWoordenboeklemmata (UnDictionary...things,) BUT! Now one of our Admins has proposed making sure anonymous people can't edit anymore! Reason: most anonymous editors do bad edits, like erasing pages, making fun of their schoolmate, you know, unUnyclopedian stuff. The measure seems to fancy a lot of the members, but it doesn't seem right. So...
I'd like to ask you how you dealt/would deal with such a problem. Surely, you were once small, too. So can you give us an advice?

Thanking y'all in advance,
Lars863 10:16, 28 June 2009 (UTC).

Post Scriptum
Also see this page: nl:Oncyclopedia:Forum:De stadsmuren van Oncyclopolis (voorstel betreft anons) (The walls of Oncyclopolis (proposal concerns anonymousses)) and if you want a translation ask me.

We've recently had another discussion about this very same matter, and most of us are not in favour or restricting IP editing, for many reasons, but mainly because it creates a blockage in the flow of new editors. It also gives out admins and poopsmiths exciting and interesting work to do, keeping them involved. This might not be right for your wiki, but most people here feel its right for ours. We'd be interested in the outcome and the longterm results though..... ;) -- Sir Mhaille Icons-flag-gb (talk to me)
Thanks for the interest, I'll keep you updated. The argument "flow of editors" has just been mentioned. D.G. Neree asked us if we'd have signed up if there'd been an edit block and I was the first answer: no. By the way, I guess that for you the interwiki argument counts more. (anonymousses making interwiki connections.) | Lars863 | 11:01, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Now Sargeant Pepper's tried to speed up the process while there is actually no majority vote! By the way, it seems that there was this cooperation project that failed and because of that we're not really listening to your advice. It's sad. Pepper's also considering to stop the just-started featuring of pictures and UnDictionary defenitions... | Lars863 | 14:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
One of the things we insist on here is majority voting on a subject before a decision is made. Except for those times with the Bureuacrats decide to do something and fuck the rest of you. Although we still take a majority vote on that. Unless it involves Codeine. -- Sir Mhaille Icons-flag-gb (talk to me)
No IPs = less people who become users
Less users = dead wiki
Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 18:30, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, not letting IPs edit just seems like you're trying to make the wiki a very exclusive club, which is a real put-off for a lot of people. - T.L.B. Baloon WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 19:25, Jun 28
Personally, I don't think you can predict the consequences of either action (blocking or keeping them as editors). I think that any and all discussions on this issue are more mere speculation than logic.  Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize  writings  SU&W) 19:29 Jun 28, 2009
Would you have joined if you went to edit as an IP and couldn't? Enough people say "No" that IP banning would probably be problematic, and it is, therefore, dangerous to contemplate. Someone could lose an eye! Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 20:56, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
I would say "No." Sir SockySexy girls Mermaid with dolphin Tired Marilyn Monroe (talk) (stalk)Magnemite Icons-flag-be GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 21:55, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, Modus, but that's looking at it retrospectively. Combine that with confirmation bias, and you've got nothing truly accurate to look at. That's why I have no opinion on the situation whatsoever, other than the fact that it's majorly blown out of proportion sometimes.  Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize  writings  SU&W) 22:00 Jun 28, 2009
Then flip the mental game around. Does letting IPs edit drive users away? Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 22:09, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, admitted, it may be rather difficult to accurately predict the consequences. But if several experienced users admit that they wouldn't have registered if they wouldn't have been able to edit as an IP, it goes to show that it's just too big a risk. Would we be willing to sacrifice the opportunity of attracting a few good contributors to minimize easily revertible vandalism? Sir SockySexy girls Mermaid with dolphin Tired Marilyn Monroe (talk) (stalk)Magnemite Icons-flag-be GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 22:17, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Now that we're facing some kind of geek who changes his IP every minute and we haven't got enough admins to cover the danger, I'm afraid we can no longer trust the anonymous and will have to block every anonymous user from editing. I'll try to make sure not everything is lost but due to this SimpsonJR guy, we will have to pump up security until we are sure we can handle the trouble he brings. I'll notify you when there is any change. | Lars863 | 09:52, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Wait, this is namely because of one guy? Well, the simpler solution is to op a few more people, not to block IPs... How many active administrators are there at Oncy? Blocking all IP edits will only drive him to create accounts and vandalise that way. It really won't stop him at all. Trust me. There's a guy here who has done that repeatedly. Tell them it won't work and a better solution would be to op two or three new administrators. MegaPleb Dexter111344 Complain here 10:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
There are 3 active admins of which I think one is going to quit soon. I've already proposed asking people from the Uncy and Désency to become admin, as they can easily recognise the really bad vandalism and can block people if reverters ask. But it seems the others don't like that idea. They also seem to be unwilling to make an interwiki forum. And indeed it's not so hard for the Simpson guy to sign up and mess up, but it's the best solution until the others accept my safety suggestions we can up the safety measures. | Lars863 | 14:19, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
As much as people would probably be willing to help I think the language issue would limit what could be seen as vandalism or not. Whether everyone agrees or not all the users of the site should be able to help guide where it is going, so don't let this become a reason to argue. At the end of it all the site should come first. Good luck, and if you need any help or advice you know where we are.... -- Sir Mhaille Icons-flag-gb (talk to me)
Hi, i am the new administrator on the Oncyclopedia, and i just want to say from DG Neree, and all the other admins that there are NO any problems. It's going fine, but it looks like that there is someone worried about the situation here with loosing 2 admins on the Oncy. We are going to choose new ones, problem, down. Other thing, IP adresses, for anonymous users making it impossible to make any edits. Well, that goes also ok, because it is there own fault, actually and there can be thing kind of; 'No! Don;t do that!! Then you will get less users and less users is a dead wiki is nonsense because if we can continue the fun and good writing, we will still getting more users (specially with an Anoymous user safety) and attention and by the way, it is not hard to create an account. It's soo easy. Only filling in name, password and other things and done. So i don't understand what the problem is. To make other people from the Uncyclopedia and other admin on the Oncyclopedia is not going to happen because we have our own candidats and admins who speak an other languige (?) then Dutch...who can it understand then? So we are only going to use our own users. Not to make you useless, no way, but i just want to say that there are no any problems and that Lars has to be calmed down and to make him clearly that it's going fine there on the Oncy. Greets and have a nice day, User:Roye7777777/sig 20:11, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
And if you wanted to help, thank you very much. But now we don't need it at the moment. User:Roye7777777/sig 20:13, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello everyone! There aren't any problems at dutch uncy. We only decided to protect the whole Oncy against anonymous users for a month, as a test, because we're a little bit fed up after what happened with a guy who constantly changed his IP. Yes of course they can make an account and they can continue to vandalise, but like this we can check users and block all their IP's. I don't understand why Lars wants to have english admins at Oncy. English admins CAN'T patrol edits wich are made by dutch people, they don't understand dutch humor. So it doesn't make sense at all! Grtz | CartoonistHenning 20:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
As I said I don't think having admins who don't speak the language would be a good idea. We do have a few Dutch people here, and one or two on our IRC channel, but none with experience of administrating a wiki. At least none that I know of.
With regards to the blocking of IP edits its up to your community to decide the best way forward. As I said above we regularly have the same discussion here, though it has always gone the way of unrestricted access when our community has voted on it. I'd have to say I'd be very interested to see how things turn out long term if you did restrict access, though of course if, as many believe, it does prove to be a block to contributors joining the site I hope that it isn't a terminal one. -- Sir Mhaille Icons-flag-gb (talk to me)
I don't know about that. Most of the admins here, if they were learned english at all, can't speak it real goodlike and yet Uncyclopedia seems to operate just fine. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 22:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I do believe Mordillo lives in Amsterdam, so I assume he probably speaks Dutch, and I think Socky (who isn't an admin, but is rather experienced in maintenance) is Belgian, so he might speak Flemish, which is a form of Dutch. --Mn-z 04:49, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, and I'm just using google translate and I'm getting the gist of the forum on that site without too much trouble. - T.L.B. Baloon WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 05:39, Jun 30
Can one of you unblock D. G. Neree? He wants to participate in this discussion. Thanks in advance | CartoonistHenning 20:20, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
It's pretty silent now :p | Cartoonist | You're nuts? Don't worry... Me too! | 20:47, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
DGNeree is an infinibanned troll on this site, and doesn't have anything to add here. If he wants to be unbanned, he knows where to find Olipro. ~Jewriken.GIF 21:00, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
“English people can't patrol Dutch posts because they don't speak Dutch.”
That's not completely true, Henning (as I've said before.) I guess English people would recognise deleting of pages and other things that catch the eye. And Roy, I don't have to be calmed down until an Uncy admin says so (your power reaches no further than the door of the Oncy ;p ) Besides, I get this feeling IP-blocking is the only thing we're even thinking about. Everytime I (or someone else) try to propose an alternative measure (like asking at Wikipedia - surely there's ONE who can help, and it's better than vandalism) you get 'Neh, it's impossible and it won't work.' If we can test blocking IPs we can also test such things.
By the way, Roy, Henning, are you having problems with getting on Oncy, too? It says it has Internal Server Problems. | Lars863 | 06:52, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Insignificant test by an infinibanned troll who can't even tell who banned him removed. You are not welcomed here, pokkelijder. ~Jewriken.GIF 14:35, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
I can't go to the Oncy also. Tech. problems looks like. We have people enough here to keep to Oncy away from further vandalism so it is unnessasary (wrong written i know, my English is not so great) to get other people to the Oncy then the people from the Oncy itself. Why are you accually worried about?
  • A you are not an admin so what are you doing without that we are knowing from this?
  • B it goes fine, no any problems, so where are you worried about?
And to make it further clear: we don't need any help or support, so just ignore these message and if we really needed help, then we came all asking. That we making it impossible for Anonymous users is their own fault, they are vandilising and do wrong things here and if we do this, it's making less work to stop those vandals/anonymous guys. Why block ano's -> less users -> dead wiki? If we keep going with writing from good articles and funny etc. we still going to get more users. User:Roye7777777/sig 09:50, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Ow, that last thing i already said up here. Ah who cares... User:Roye7777777/sig 09:51, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Lars, it doesn't make sense at all. The anons are not so stereotypical! They often make edits like cybernagging and incrowd humor, but ENGLISH admins CAN'T patrol them. Again: it doesn't make sense and it's ridiculous. Ehm Lars, a small question: do you think the oncy has to move to wikia? Cartoonist | You're nuts? Don't worry... Me too! | 09:53, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Yes indeed, the oncy is down, but the matter can be solved every minute | Cartoonist | You're nuts? Don't worry... Me too! | 10:03, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
(I'm going to speak Dutch for a moment) DG, ik snap dat je iets tegen de Uncy hebt (ik zou ook niet blij zijn met een ban) en ik snap dat ik een beetje tegen je standpunt in ga, maar hopelijk snap je ook dat ik probeer te helpen (en ik snap dat het er soms vervelend uitkomt...) Maar dan hoef je niet te zeggen dat ik maar niet meer op de Oncy moet schrijven... Ik houd niet van persoonlijke aanvallen... Als de uitslag bekend is, hoor je me er niet meer over tot een volgende stemming, maar zolang het debat aan de gang blijf ik debatteren.
(Now back to English) Well, Cartoonist, I don't know. If Wikia is a more reliable server, I'd say yes. But DG, Pepper, Rongo etc. probably have more insight (you were members when Oncy was still part of Wikia, right?) By the way, I tried mailing to the Webmaster (CarlB, right?) but the "delivery of the message to the recipients failed." In other words, it didn't send the message properly.
Roy, well, since this Simpson guy had a lot of different IPs, we don't really know how many anonymous users were doing bad things. By the way, I'm not sure if I caught the meaning of this sentence: "We have people enough here to keep to Oncy away from further vandalism." Do you mean there enough admins and reverters? | Lars863 | 10:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Look, we have our owne server. We pay for it and we're independent! And... we (me too) are really happy with it. We DON'T need any commercials of wikia and we don't want that wikia admins get involved at Oncy. Our wiki is OURS and is a site of OUR users and not a wikia-patrolled site. That was what we (except Lars obviously) wanted to say | Cartoonist | You're nuts? Don't worry... Me too! | 10:46, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
It is only delivering advertising and other stuff we don't like.
(i'm going to speak in Dutch now) Genoeg controleurs en andere mensen ja. En met het admin tekort, we hebben genoeg kandidaten die admin kunnen worden. Maak je daar maar geen zorgen over. (English) And don't forget that 95% of the anonymous edits is vandalism, clearing pages, and other bad things. And if we go to Wikia (what is not gonna happen i think) we get more (what you already said) advertising i think. User:Roye7777777/sig 10:53, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Now, for the whole "Let's go the Wikia"-dream of yours Lars, that won't ever happen on my watch. We got our own server for which we pay for. Wikia is an organisation with makes money over the backs of the contributors. Also, haven't you ever noticed the huge amount of advertising on Wikia-wiki's? Sure, there are Wikia-wiki's (like this one) where they have an agreement on the subject. But I'm not going to let some company make money on the work we do for free. Also, you're stating that the Oncyclopedia was part of Wikia, that is incorrect. I've been around for 2 years now and as far as I recall it we always were on CarlB's server.
To finish this, why does everyone think it comes natural that anyone can contribute to a website? On almost every site you need to make an account which takes a heck of a lot longer to do then on a wiki where a username and a password are enough. We have almost everyone in favor of the idea, so we will try it out. SimpsonJr is not the reason I want to prevent IP's from editing, it's an idea I've been working on for a while now (along with the proxybanning which is a major pain in the ass, excuse my language). Ow well, I think I've said everything there is to say.
One last notice: please write English here even though it isn't your primary language. We aren't on the Oncyclopedia but on the Uncyclopedia.
Greetings from a sergeant who used to be on your IRC, Sgt pepper 10:59, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Also, we don't have any advertising at all. If the time comes we need advertising I'll personally will start a donation-project to pay for the server. Heck, I can easily mis 200 bucks a month... Sgt pepper 11:03, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Sorry if my post on Wikia was confusing, but I thought that Cartoonist was making a serious suggestion and I didn't say "Yes, let's do that, because Wikia is sooo much better!" I said "Well, I don't know, is it more reliable?" | Lars863 | 11:27, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Lars, I wanted to see what your conclusion is about oncyclopedia, I wanted to see if you're more interested in Wikia-concept than our owne concept. The question is: are you happy with oncyclopedia as it is currently, or do you think we are so stupid to move the oncy to wikia? We know what we're doing and you don't have to tell them here that we have problems. We don't have any problems! You only sett up a big discussion wich doesn't make any sense at all. You're exaggerating, and not a bit | Cartoonist | You're nuts? Don't worry... Me too! | 11:45, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
And Lars, Carl has nothing to do with oncyclopedia, we have our owne server. Why the hell do you mail him for? Cartoonist | You're nuts? Don't worry... Me too! | 11:50, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, no problem... our site is down... ;) I mailed, as the error description said. I thought that that was CarlB. Anyway, to take away some tension from this discussion; anyone has any tips for an article on Brittany? :) | Lars863 | 11:58, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Lars, it just shows how ill-informed you are about this whole thing and you are wasting everybody's time | Cartoonist | You're nuts? Don't worry... Me too! | 12:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools