This is a draft proposal which I want to get some feedback on before filing a request for comment. (submitted for the 2017 wishlist survey - but didn't make the final two" meta:Community Wishlist Survey 2017/Anti-harassment/Smart blocking)
Though it is currently in my userspace collaborators are welcome, and critics too - but if you think the idea won't fly I'd prefer that you put your case on the talkpage and leave this page for the proposal.
Since December 2004 our admins have performed
over 4.5 million blocks. Whilst many of these have expired and over 90,000 have been unblocked, the total number of IP addresses currently blocked is far greater. This is partly because when you
hard block an account you also
block the next IP address they try to log on at, but also because many whole ranges of IP addresses have been blocked.
Blocking is of course necessary to protect the pedia from vandals, spammers, trolls and worse. But sometimes we block good editors as well, and that is never a good thing. Aside from hopefully small numbers of incorrect blocks, there are three large groups of editors who we currently block but don't really want to.
When we block IP address with a Hardblock we currently accept that for as long as the block lasts any future editors at that IP address are unable to edit without logging in. To further the collateral damage any blocked editor where Autoblock has been set and who logs in at a blocked IP will be blocked and can spread that block to other IPs as they try to edit elsewhere.
So how do we change things to reduce collateral damage whilst still being able to block the people we want to block?
These changes are technically feasible, though they would require some development costs.
Because we currently only keep checkuser data for a limited period of time, smart blocks will only be possible where the most recent offending edit is in the last few months. It will also be necessary to change our data retention policy so as to retain some checkuser data for longer. So when an IP or IP range is smart blocked the checkuser data for the blockworthy edit will be retained for the duration of the block. This would include the operating system and browser used to make the blockworthy edit. Subsequent edits by that IP or IP range will only be accepted if they are from a different sort of PC, but apart from the "blockworthy edit" there should be no need to store such info for longer than normal. Ϣere SpielChequers 17:32, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
This is a draft proposal which I want to get some feedback on before filing a request for comment. (submitted for the 2017 wishlist survey - but didn't make the final two" meta:Community Wishlist Survey 2017/Anti-harassment/Smart blocking)
Though it is currently in my userspace collaborators are welcome, and critics too - but if you think the idea won't fly I'd prefer that you put your case on the talkpage and leave this page for the proposal.
Since December 2004 our admins have performed
over 4.5 million blocks. Whilst many of these have expired and over 90,000 have been unblocked, the total number of IP addresses currently blocked is far greater. This is partly because when you
hard block an account you also
block the next IP address they try to log on at, but also because many whole ranges of IP addresses have been blocked.
Blocking is of course necessary to protect the pedia from vandals, spammers, trolls and worse. But sometimes we block good editors as well, and that is never a good thing. Aside from hopefully small numbers of incorrect blocks, there are three large groups of editors who we currently block but don't really want to.
When we block IP address with a Hardblock we currently accept that for as long as the block lasts any future editors at that IP address are unable to edit without logging in. To further the collateral damage any blocked editor where Autoblock has been set and who logs in at a blocked IP will be blocked and can spread that block to other IPs as they try to edit elsewhere.
So how do we change things to reduce collateral damage whilst still being able to block the people we want to block?
These changes are technically feasible, though they would require some development costs.
Because we currently only keep checkuser data for a limited period of time, smart blocks will only be possible where the most recent offending edit is in the last few months. It will also be necessary to change our data retention policy so as to retain some checkuser data for longer. So when an IP or IP range is smart blocked the checkuser data for the blockworthy edit will be retained for the duration of the block. This would include the operating system and browser used to make the blockworthy edit. Subsequent edits by that IP or IP range will only be accepted if they are from a different sort of PC, but apart from the "blockworthy edit" there should be no need to store such info for longer than normal. Ϣere SpielChequers 17:32, 23 December 2012 (UTC)