|
This thread is for discussing recent bans. Don't discuss other topics here. Take it to website feedback if you disagree with a ban or want to raise an issue. Keep it civil.NOTE: For those of you who want to find the actual ABL thread where the bans are posted. Please look in here: https://tl.net/forum/closed-threads/ |
On November 08 2016 07:05 LegalLord wrote:
I tried to change the word "deer" to "beer" on a Wikipedia page and only lasted about 30 minutes. Though they did undo one typo fix I made on some other page so it might have been just automated.
Also I have a friend who was a mod on Wikipedia and knew the system well enough to know how to fabricate stuff and get away with it. A very obscure made up story he made lasted about a week - the longest I've seen an act of Wikipedia vandalism survive.
i once used wikipedia to save part of an essay i wrote on a public computer when i couldnt get into my email. just dumped the text on my profile temporarily.
|
The olden days of yore, when emailing yourself was not yet invented.
|
Johto5012 Posts
On November 08 2016 07:05 LegalLord wrote:
I tried to change the word "deer" to "beer" on a Wikipedia page and only lasted about 30 minutes. Though they did undo one typo fix I made on some other page so it might have been just automated.
Also I have a friend who was a mod on Wikipedia and knew the system well enough to know how to fabricate stuff and get away with it. A very obscure made up story he made lasted about a week - the longest I've seen an act of Wikipedia vandalism survive.
In fact Wikipedia, and Liquipedia as well but to a lesser extent, is heavily dependent on bots, so this is very likely to be an automated rollback. The software behind both Wikipedia and Liquipedia has a very nice API to facilitate that as well.
|
On November 08 2016 07:52 FO-nTTaX wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2016 07:05 LegalLord wrote:
I tried to change the word "deer" to "beer" on a Wikipedia page and only lasted about 30 minutes. Though they did undo one typo fix I made on some other page so it might have been just automated.
Also I have a friend who was a mod on Wikipedia and knew the system well enough to know how to fabricate stuff and get away with it. A very obscure made up story he made lasted about a week - the longest I've seen an act of Wikipedia vandalism survive. In fact Wikipedia, and Liquipedia as well but to a lesser extent, is heavily dependent on bots, so this is very likely to be an automated rollback. The software behind both Wikipedia and Liquipedia has a very nice API to facilitate that as well.
Yeah defacing wikipedia is pretty hard. Glad to know Liqupedia is hard ot mess with as well. Thanks Phone tax
|
There are instructions online how to effectively deface wikipedia - this probably lowers their efficiency significantly, if the "good" users actually read them  I have once read one that called the user to make two accounts, build some trust and then use one to "revert" the vandalism of the other one, while sneaking in some bonuses. This can be eventually extended to a multi-layer scheme. The general problem is that choosing a low-interest article makes it much easier, but also much more pointless.
|
On November 08 2016 07:45 LegalLord wrote:
The olden days of yore, when emailing yourself was not yet invented.
I still move files by e-mailing myself. I only stopped recently after I set up a dropbox account and put it on my PC and laptop.
|
On November 08 2016 07:52 FO-nTTaX wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2016 07:05 LegalLord wrote:
I tried to change the word "deer" to "beer" on a Wikipedia page and only lasted about 30 minutes. Though they did undo one typo fix I made on some other page so it might have been just automated.
Also I have a friend who was a mod on Wikipedia and knew the system well enough to know how to fabricate stuff and get away with it. A very obscure made up story he made lasted about a week - the longest I've seen an act of Wikipedia vandalism survive. In fact Wikipedia, and Liquipedia as well but to a lesser extent, is heavily dependent on bots, so this is very likely to be an automated rollback. The software behind both Wikipedia and Liquipedia has a very nice API to facilitate that as well.
Wikipedia has the recent change patrol. People who check in real time the change made to every articles and correct what is obviously vandalism.
If you pass the RC patrol, then every person who has contributed to the article you tried to screw will have your change in his feed.
So altogether, wikipedia has two very reliable layers of protections against vandalism: an immediate one and a medium term one.
|
Johto5012 Posts
yeah but that patrol is for parts done with bots. We have a similar system in place.
|
On November 09 2016 01:18 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2016 07:45 LegalLord wrote:
The olden days of yore, when emailing yourself was not yet invented. I still move files by e-mailing myself. I only stopped recently after I set up a dropbox account and put it on my PC and laptop.
I usually use email or a git repository.
|
On November 09 2016 06:31 FO-nTTaX wrote:
yeah but that patrol is for parts done with bots. We have a similar system in place.
Well, I have left wikipedia for over 6 years, but in the good old time it was man made work. I even had a cyber police cap on my profile for my good services :D
|
i'll admit. i laughed. seeker did not.
GreenHorizons was just temp banned for 2 days by Seeker.
That account was created on 2011-04-16 10:56:04 and had 8699 posts.
Reason: If you thought posting that was a good idea... It was not.
On November 09 2016 13:38 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2016 13:32 LegalLord wrote:
32% reporting, Washington favors Trump.
Well GH, I have to say that regardless of who wins Washington in the end, even I didn't believe you this far. This general election has thoroughly vindicated you - though I'm not sure that we're all happy with what that will cost us all. Live drone shot of Kwizach's election party + Show Spoiler +User was temp banned for this post.
|
He knew the consequences. He knew it was worth the ban.
I on the other hand am a coward. I've spent enough time banned for trolling and I'm not willing to do more towards that end.
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On November 09 2016 14:14 dAPhREAk wrote:i'll admit. i laughed. seeker did not. Show nested quote +GreenHorizons was just temp banned for 2 days by Seeker.
That account was created on 2011-04-16 10:56:04 and had 8699 posts.
Reason: If you thought posting that was a good idea... It was not. Show nested quote +On November 09 2016 13:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 09 2016 13:32 LegalLord wrote:
32% reporting, Washington favors Trump.
Well GH, I have to say that regardless of who wins Washington in the end, even I didn't believe you this far. This general election has thoroughly vindicated you - though I'm not sure that we're all happy with what that will cost us all. Live drone shot of Kwizach's election party + Show Spoiler +User was temp banned for this post.
GreenHorizons chose to drink the Kool-Aid.
|
gimme a 2 day ban so I go talk politics somewhere I don't care if I get banned
(hey free report stats)
User was temp banned for this post.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On November 09 2016 14:14 dAPhREAk wrote:i'll admit. i laughed. seeker did not. Show nested quote +GreenHorizons was just temp banned for 2 days by Seeker.
That account was created on 2011-04-16 10:56:04 and had 8699 posts.
Reason: If you thought posting that was a good idea... It was not. Show nested quote +On November 09 2016 13:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 09 2016 13:32 LegalLord wrote:
32% reporting, Washington favors Trump.
Well GH, I have to say that regardless of who wins Washington in the end, even I didn't believe you this far. This general election has thoroughly vindicated you - though I'm not sure that we're all happy with what that will cost us all. Live drone shot of Kwizach's election party + Show Spoiler +User was temp banned for this post.
I kinda laughed too. At least it was mass suicide (still sad) rather than mass murder.
|
Pretty poor taste honestly but I can't say I didn't chuckle.
|
Don't see why it's poor taste ; GH got attacked very harshly in the US Politics thread by Clinton supporters. He payed back in a rather funny and uninsulting way.
|
that is hilarious.
what's the deal with Tolkien?
|
|
|
On November 09 2016 15:00 Jaaaaasper wrote:
gimme a 2 day ban so I go talk politics somewhere I don't care if I get banned
(hey free report stats)
User was temp banned for this post.
Hahaha, you made me laugh :-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i0.wp.com/www.whaleoil.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Jonestown-2.jpg)
