Thread Subject: Re: Requests from General forfutureconsiderations
This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.
From: Jared Smith
Date: Mon, Oct 30 2006 4:40 PM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: Gregg Vanderheiden: "Re: Requests from General forfuture considerations"
- Previous message in thread: Peter Korn: "Re: Requests from General forfuture considerations"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
On 10/30/06, Peter Korn wrote:
> I'm not suggesting that we prevent interested members of the public from
> joining the discussions. Rather, I'm suggesting that we add a human
> layer in between the website wiki & mailing list sign-up pages, to
> filter out robots and anyone who simply wants to maliciously alter our
> website. In the past week I've heard of multiple instances of this,
> which is why I suggest it.
That makes a lot more sense. But is there really a problem that needs to be
solved? Besides one very isolated problem (and this due to my own
oversight), there doesn't appear to be spam or malicious behavior occurring.
The spam that did hit the wiki was done by a human who would have probably
gone through the human verification process anyways. The method they used is
no longer available. If there are other problems I'm not aware of, please
let me know so I can take actions to remedy and prevent them. Great lengths
have been taken to ensure that those posting to lists and modifying the wiki
are humans with real e-mail addresses. Nearly all spam and destructive
actions are blocked. I've moderated a list with over 1000 members that has
the exact settings the TEITAC lists have and there has been two or three
spam messages in almost 10,000 legitimate message over the last 6 years
(this statement is certain to cause instantaneous and devastating spam
attacks!). I'd also point out that Wikipedia has MUCH less stringent
authoring and editing requirements than our wiki does. By adding the human
intervention level, I fear that we would be creating a large amount of work
to solve a non-existant or very minor problem. And, as you ask, who would do
this work anyways?
- Next message in Thread: Gregg Vanderheiden: "Re: Requests from General forfuture considerations"
- Previous message in Thread: Peter Korn: "Re: Requests from General forfuture considerations"