Hi all!

Quoting Gary Fisher <gafisher at sprynet.com>:
> > The people using the Swiki for other things than "Squeak" must surely
> > have seen the first page and are aware of the fact that this swiki is
> > for Squeak.
> 
> Not at all necessarily, Göran.  One can easily jump (and link) to an
> individual Swiki page and completely bypass the top of the Swiki.  It
> is
> entirely possible some, perhaps even most, of those misusing the Squeak
> Swiki are not aware of the actual purpose.

Well, but I still find it unlikely and actually unrelevant. If we choose to add
some form of password for writing then they will have to at least read the top page.

> > But still, if they need to get onto the mailinglist (or something) to
> > get a password this will not really be needed either.
> 
> True, but as discussed here previously (several times now) linking
> Swiki
> access to list membership would effectively close the Squeak Swiki to
> many
> of the people for whom it should be most accessible.

I don't agree. It wouldn't be closed for READING. But sure, for editing the
pages it would be closed unless you do something very simple, like for example
ask somebody for the password or whatever.

But why not? I mean, the swiki IS for documenting Squeak and for things related
to Squeak - it is a support tool for the Squeak community, right?

So why not simply have some very simple way of getting a password for writing on
it. Note that you don't need to be a member of the list or anything - that was
just an example of how we do it. The important point is having a password for
WRITING. That's all I am talking about.

> > True. But that would have to be a question for the people hosting
> Minnow
> > since their own laws apply over there.
> 
> The most likely response if that question were raised by government,
> press
> or law enforcement would be to shut it down until and unless far
> stricter
> standards than any we've discussed here were in place.  Even without
> that,
> if Swiki pages were used to promote, for example, failed 1930s
> political
> philosophies, access could become illegal in entire countries outside
> of
> that in which Minnow happens to live today.
> 
> Göran, I noticed that most of the material on the pages connected with
> the
> one you posted at the top of this thread had last been edited almost
> two

Well, it popped up at "Recent changes" so that is why I looked at it.

> months ago.  One one hand we could argue that the problem can't be very
> serious if it took two months for someone to notice it, but on the other
> we
> must recognize that there is apparently no system currently in place
> even to
> *find*, much less to deal with, any sort of improper use of the Squeak
> Swiki.  Whatever the method chosen, I agree strongly with you that
> *something* must be done.

Yes. Pollution makes searching harder for one thing. And pages pop up that I
need to look at and waste time trying to find out if it has to do with Squeak or
not.

I can see NO REASON WHATSOEVER to let this continue. I mean hey, start up
another Swiki for them and direct them there.

regards, Göran

Göran Hultgren, goran.hultgren at bluefish.se
GSM: +46 70 3933950, http://www.bluefish.se
\"Department of Redundancy department.\" -- ThinkGeek