http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=937187

Due to the disruptive antics of certain visitors to the Monastery, most anonymous posting is currently blocked, as well as posting by monks with negative XP. This is a fluid situation -- these and other potentially heavy-handed actions may be employed or rolled back with little or no notice.

Once things have settled down or when the round-tuits for the implementation of a more surgical approach have been obtained, this will be rolled back.

The need for these measures is disappointing, but necessary.

Update (2011-Nov-10): Thank you to all of the monks in the CB yesterday who proofread and made suggestions for wording.

--MidLifeXis

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Current posting ability limitations
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Nov 10, 2011 at 01:59 UTC
    a more surgical approach

    My suggestion for a more surgical approach -- for the interim at least -- would be for anonymous monk posts to only show up to those over (say) level 20 until they have been approved. That same group would be to consider them for reaping.

    Since only those over the chosen level will be able to see them, only they can approve them, but there should be sufficient people around at most times to ensure the good stuff don't wait too long for approval.

    Anonymous flames and trolls would be invisible when posted -- thereby removing any positive re-enforcement -- and disappear without trace if offensive.

    Good AM posts get through as desired.

    With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
    Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
    "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
    In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
[reply]

      Unfortunately, that choice wasn't in the drop-down menu this morning when I was late for a meeting at my day job.

      But your interim approach would be to extend the approval system or invent a new approval system so it could apply to replies, not just root nodes? And update all thread display code to hide unapproved replies? And add approval status notifications and approve-this form elements to the display of all replies?

      Heck, that's a lot more work than the longer-term features I've been planning to add.

      Of course, part of the reason for that is that the approval system and the thread display is some of the least-well-factored and ugliest code on the site. ):

      (Node title not updated until after posting just to double-check that the posting bug is indeed fixed.)

      - tye        

[reply]
        But your interim approach would be ...

        When you put it that way, I guess not.

        S'the trouble with invisible code-bases, observers can only guess as to what might be easy to implement.

        With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
        Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
        "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
        In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
[reply]

      BrowserUk:

      It seems that trolls need pennance, so limiting the AM posts to level 2 and above would be equivalent!</joke>

      ...roboticus

      When your only tool is a troll-hammer, all posts look like trolls.

[reply]
        When your only tool is a troll-hammer, all posts look like trolls.

        LOL. Brilliant!

        s/pennance/pennants/. Stupid spellchecker!

[reply]
[d/l]

      I'm surprised tye didn't mention it, but, it's been our long-standing philosophy (note - philosophy, not policy) that making new posts "too invisible" to the poster is generally not a good thing, and that the problem is worse for users of lower experience level, with it being particularly noxious for AM. The reasoning (based on experience) is that if the user can't see the post she just submitted, she'll post it again. And again. And again. We don't need that.

      I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.
[reply]
Re: Current posting ability limitations
by Argel (Prior) on Nov 15, 2011 at 00:42 UTC
[reply]

      I believe due to their ephemeral nature, the restrictions do not merit an announcement in Tidings.

      HTH,

      planetscape
[reply]
        Even if the changes are ephemeral, announcing the new policy in Tidings would seem prudent. Something like "at times, anonymous posting may be disabled..." and then link back to this thread.

        Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks
        My deviantART gallery
[reply]
Re: Current posting ability limitations
by Sewi (Friar) on Nov 16, 2011 at 13:04 UTC
[reply]

      See some of the following posts (some related directly to PerlMonks, others only tangentially) for previous discussion on this topic:

      --MidLifeXis

[reply]
Re: Current posting ability limitations
by Xiong (Hermit) on Dec 10, 2011 at 08:13 UTC

    So as a result of fractious complaints about the ability of Anonymous Monk to post; it can no longer post? Is that right?

    Feste: Misprison in the highest degree. Lady, cucullus non facit monachum. That's as much to say as, I wear not motley in my brain....
[reply]
[d/l]

      I'm not sure how you get from

      Due to the disruptive antics of certain visitors to the Monastery most anonymous posting is currently blocked

      to

      So as a result of fractious complaints about the ability of Anonymous Monk to post; it can no longer post?

      A look at Newest Nodes shows me that Anonymous Monk still can and does post replies.

[reply]
[reply]

Back to Perl Monks Discussion