On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 11:40:17 +1000, Tim Starling
<ts4294967296(a)hotmail.com> gave utterance to the following:
Allan Crossman wrote:
May I
suggest one more piece of logic?
An IP block is automatically released if a non-banned user logs in on
it.
(which means that the IP has been reassigned away from the vandal)
Hrmm. I thought part of the joy of IP blocks was that vandal user
accounts can't come in from that IP either. I've used this at least
once to ban a logged-
in vandal.
A vandal shouldn't be able to escape the block by creating new user
accounts (or falling back to user accounts that already exist)
Yes, I don't think it would be a good idea to have them automatically
released. It's far more likely that it's a banned user trying to
circumvent the system than another person altogether.
Which is why I said non-banned. Presumably the system knows which
user-names are banned.
I guess have in mind that there should be two levels of banning
usernames: permanent, and short term (maybe 24 or 48 hours cooling off
time, with a 3 strikes policy).
And at an even milder level, we could maybe have an "educate" function:
When reverting a change by a first-timer, the IP gets stored and the next
editing attempt by that IP gets redirected to an education page WITHOUT a
24-hour block.
--
Richard Grevers
Between two evils always pick the one you haven't tried