3 ms·

Doing so would diminish the user community's ability to self police those edits somewhat. It's important to understand that Wikipedia is a public collaboration

by nullc 6y ago

Doing so would diminish the user community's ability to self police those edits somewhat. It's important to understand that Wikipedia is a public collaboration to a much greater degree than any other large websites are-- it's more like a big open source software project. Wikipedia's viability depends critically on hundreds of millions of dollars of year of uncompensated volunteer labor by self-selecting contributors-- and a major component of that includes anti-vandalism. As my sibling comment laments, Wikipedians directly feel the pain of any reduction in their anti-abuse toolchest-- while the countributor's privacy is almost a pure externality. It's trivial to create an account, so any contributor that cares can self-serve a solution-- at least if they're sophisticated enough. If they're not even that sophisticated they're not exactly likely to make a case for this kind of change. It also provide a bit of a false sense of privacy since the information is still retained by the site and available to many-- though the same situation exists for logged in users. I think advocating access via tor would be more important: It's unfortunate to create a situation where a user's life or freedom might be endangered due to their contributions unethical-but-lawful order (or an accidental data breach) forces Wikimedia to expose them.

surround 6y ago
But how does allowing everyone to see IP addresses help with anti-vandalism? There’s already the CheckUser if there needs to be an IP-block ban. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CheckUser https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CheckUser As for privacy, allowing everyone to associate your IP address with your edit history is quite different than only allowing the website to see it. The reason I bring this up is because there have been quite a few times where I’ve wanted to make a quick copy edit, but I don’t, because I don’t want the edit and the name of the article I read to be permanently associated with my IP address. Preferring anonymity and the ability to change identities, I hate having a permanent account for online interactions. I‘ve made a lot of temporary account on various websites, but most of the time it’s not worth creating a temporary account for a tiny edit on Wikipedia. So I don’t bother. Maybe I’m a unique case, but I’m still willing to bet that there would be more interaction from non-logged-in users on Wikipedia if their IP address were hidden. (As a side note, the reason why I’ve stuck with this HN account for so long is because there is a limit to how many accounts an IP address can make before getting banned.)
- capableweb 6y ago
  I guess you're one of few with a static address, where doing something via your IP can automatically be connected to you as a person. I've made plenty of Wikipedia contributions, but going to "my" user page with my current one, I find none. I don't care about if someone can connect the IP with my contributions. But I completely understand if you're making more "risky" edits and/or have a IP address attached to you like that. Then it makes sense. And if it's too much to create an account for the tiny edit, I guess it'll be left like it is. Some things I see on Wikipedia are wrong too, but the work to verify, archive, link and do the edit, is more than the edit is worth in terms of shared knowledge, so I skip it too. On the other hand, I quite like that you can connect the ASN with edits on Wikipedia. Makes it very obvious what organizations are trying to influence what in which direction. But maybe the information doesn't have to be fully public, require a different access rule than just user.
  - surround 6y ago
    I don’t have a static IP (but I do share one), and I don’t really make any “risky” edits. Yet the thought of my online activity potentially being tied back to myself makes me uncomfortable enough to not contribute.
- nullc 6y ago
  > But how does allowing everyone to see IP addresses help with anti-vandalism? There’s already the CheckUser if there needs to be an IP-block ban. It scales better. Pretty much just that. > Maybe I’m a unique case, but I’m still willing to bet that there would be more interaction from non-logged-in users on Wikipedia if their IP address were hidden. You're not. Though WP would generally prefer you not use throwaway accounts (as would HN, for that matter!). It's unclear how many people it discourages-- a lot of people manage to make edits without realizing their IP will be displayed because they miss the warnings. Users asking the site to delete edits that were accidentally IP-exposing is a not-infrequent support request. Users suffering unwelcome exposure is largely an external cost (except for those support requests, and the invisible long term discouragement-to-contribution).
  - 6y ago

by nullc 6y ago

surround 6y ago

But how does allowing everyone to see IP addresses help with anti-vandalism? There’s already the CheckUser if there needs to be an IP-block ban. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CheckUser https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CheckUser As for privacy, allowing everyone to associate your IP address with your edit history is quite different than only allowing the website to see it. The reason I bring this up is because there have been quite a few times where I’ve wanted to make a quick copy edit, but I don’t, because I don’t want the edit and the name of the article I read to be permanently associated with my IP address. Preferring anonymity and the ability to change identities, I hate having a permanent account for online interactions. I‘ve made a lot of temporary account on various websites, but most of the time it’s not worth creating a temporary account for a tiny edit on Wikipedia. So I don’t bother. Maybe I’m a unique case, but I’m still willing to bet that there would be more interaction from non-logged-in users on Wikipedia if their IP address were hidden. (As a side note, the reason why I’ve stuck with this HN account for so long is because there is a limit to how many accounts an IP address can make before getting banned.)

capableweb 6y ago
I guess you're one of few with a static address, where doing something via your IP can automatically be connected to you as a person. I've made plenty of Wikipedia contributions, but going to "my" user page with my current one, I find none. I don't care about if someone can connect the IP with my contributions. But I completely understand if you're making more "risky" edits and/or have a IP address attached to you like that. Then it makes sense. And if it's too much to create an account for the tiny edit, I guess it'll be left like it is. Some things I see on Wikipedia are wrong too, but the work to verify, archive, link and do the edit, is more than the edit is worth in terms of shared knowledge, so I skip it too. On the other hand, I quite like that you can connect the ASN with edits on Wikipedia. Makes it very obvious what organizations are trying to influence what in which direction. But maybe the information doesn't have to be fully public, require a different access rule than just user.
- surround 6y ago
  I don’t have a static IP (but I do share one), and I don’t really make any “risky” edits. Yet the thought of my online activity potentially being tied back to myself makes me uncomfortable enough to not contribute.
nullc 6y ago
> But how does allowing everyone to see IP addresses help with anti-vandalism? There’s already the CheckUser if there needs to be an IP-block ban. It scales better. Pretty much just that. > Maybe I’m a unique case, but I’m still willing to bet that there would be more interaction from non-logged-in users on Wikipedia if their IP address were hidden. You're not. Though WP would generally prefer you not use throwaway accounts (as would HN, for that matter!). It's unclear how many people it discourages-- a lot of people manage to make edits without realizing their IP will be displayed because they miss the warnings. Users asking the site to delete edits that were accidentally IP-exposing is a not-infrequent support request. Users suffering unwelcome exposure is largely an external cost (except for those support requests, and the invisible long term discouragement-to-contribution).
- 6y ago