X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Fri Jul  3 19:49:48 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <929ed1ec0907031037y65bb9281s702802875fbd0561@mail.gmail.com>
References: <494251.20348.qm@web33303.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<25890ca0907021428s5997a90as447efda71372cc26@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4D280F.7090905@post.pl>
	<25890ca0907021446x1c20adaag965ad81dc2a9b51a@mail.gmail.com>
	<c3b2b3db0907021634w6bc61f23k31b807685662b95f@mail.gmail.com>
	<c3b2b3db0907021754n3cd9a333h607ea5776c255c2@mail.gmail.com>
	<929ed1ec0907030405g42795161v42139e17b152138e@mail.gmail.com>
	<c3b2b3db0907030653o5928e41aw439e18821d17a4e9@mail.gmail.com>
	<c3b2b3db0907030703x1d8c2757l2beba1bb3610c16c@mail.gmail.com>
	<929ed1ec0907031037y65bb9281s702802875fbd0561@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 12:49:35 -0500
Message-ID: <25890ca0907031049j2430b7a8o6916404bbdc51517@mail.gmail.com>
From: radek szulga <rsszulga@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: -0.8
X-Spam_score_int: -7
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software,
	running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or
	label similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview:  As long as we're being devious here, what about
	"Kamikaze Sock" accounts? In your typical case to get somebody for edit
	warring you have to create the opportunity for them to revert a lot.
	But
	if you're doing this yourself then that means that you expose yourself
	to charge of edit warring as well. Alternatively, a few of us can get
	together and uh, well, tag-team, but then we get accused of tag-teaming.
	[...] Content analysis details:   (-0.8 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ----------------------
	--------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	0.1 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7-deb (2006-10-05) on 
	pakkun.mirky.net
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] Hanzo (was Women and Wiklp)
X-BeenThere: folks@wikipedometer.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Id: Wikipedia statistics <folks.wikipedometer.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Help: <mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7448049366020830149=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: -0.8
X-Spam_score_int: -7
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
	similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview:  As long as we're being devious here, what about
	"Kamikaze Sock" accounts? In your typical case to get somebody for edit
	warring you have to create the opportunity for them to revert a lot. But
	if you're doing this yourself then that means that you expose yourself
	to charge of edit warring as well. Alternatively, a few of us can get
	together and uh, well, tag-team, but then we get accused of tag-teaming.
	[...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.8 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	0.1 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

--===============7448049366020830149==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015175ccfbe8c99c1046dd0c713

--0015175ccfbe8c99c1046dd0c713
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

As long as we're being devious here, what about "Kamikaze Sock" accounts?
In your typical case to get somebody for edit warring you have to create the
opportunity for them to revert a lot. But if you're doing this yourself then
that means that you expose yourself to charge of edit warring as well.
Alternatively, a few of us can get together and uh, well, tag-team, but then
we get accused of tag-teaming.

Instead if somebody makes an IP account, makes some minor edits to establish
a minor history and then basically "sleeps" until a relevant dispute
develops, then comes in, reverts a few times, gets the other side to revert
a lot - then they both get restricted but the Sock was a throwaway account
anyway and the other side has a blemish on their record.

In a weaker way that's essentially what that annoying anon is doing to us on
the Poland/German pages.

To make it work the IPs would probably have to be created by someone in a
big city, the background history would be on articles only weakly related,
and care would have to be taken so that whatever edit summaries/comments are
made don't resemble the main account - faking bad English might be a good
way to go.

It might not work the first or second time so multiple "sleeper" accounts
would be a good - the idea being to substitute the quantity of multiple
"throw away" accounts for quantity of edits and not give CU much to work
with.

Of course the strategy has big potential danger so maybe editors with less
too loose - those already under serious restrictions, like mayb Molobo,
would be the best candidates.

Radek

2009/7/3 Digwuren <digwuren@gmail.com>

> On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 17:03, Andrei Dombay <wikibiophys@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> P.S. If you open 20 different accounts from the same computer and IP, all
>> of them will be detected by checkuser when one of the accounts reported.
>> That's what happened with LokiiT.
>
>
> Which means that in order for the change-accounts-as-socks strategy to
> work, you'll have to
> 1. not open all the accounts at once;
> 2. discard the old account when opening a new one.  Having multiple
> accounts but not using them together is expressly permitted by the sock
> policy.  Naturally, this policy doesn't mean much *but* having multiple
> accounts and not using them together will significantly reduce the
> likelihood that somebody might figure out they're related.  And this will
> mean lower likelihood of checkuser in the first place.
>
> --
> Andres Soolo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia statistics discussion list
> folks@wikipedometer.net
> http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks
>
>

--0015175ccfbe8c99c1046dd0c713
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

As long as we&#39;re being devious here, what about &quot;Kamikaze Sock&quo=
t; accounts?<br>In your typical case to get somebody for edit warring you h=
ave to create the opportunity for them to revert a lot. But if you&#39;re d=
oing this yourself then that means that you expose yourself to charge of ed=
it warring as well. Alternatively, a few of us can get together and uh, wel=
l, tag-team, but then we get accused of tag-teaming.<br>
<br>Instead if somebody makes an IP account, makes some minor edits to esta=
blish a minor history and then basically &quot;sleeps&quot; until a relevan=
t dispute develops, then comes in, reverts a few times, gets the other side=
 to revert a lot - then they both get restricted but the Sock was a throwaw=
ay account anyway and the other side has a blemish on their record.<br>
<br>In a weaker way that&#39;s essentially what that annoying anon is doing=
 to us on the Poland/German pages.<br><br>To make it work the IPs would pro=
bably have to be created by someone in a big city, the background history w=
ould be on articles only weakly related, and care would have to be taken so=
 that whatever edit summaries/comments are made don&#39;t resemble the main=
 account - faking bad English might be a good way to go. <br>
<br>It might not work the first or second time so multiple &quot;sleeper&qu=
ot; accounts would be a good - the idea being to substitute the quantity of=
 multiple &quot;throw away&quot; accounts for quantity of edits and not giv=
e CU much to work with.<br>
<br>Of course the strategy has big potential danger so maybe editors with l=
ess too loose - those already under serious restrictions, like mayb Molobo,=
 would be the best candidates.<br><br>Radek<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quot=
e">
2009/7/3 Digwuren <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:digwuren@gmail.co=
m">digwuren@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" s=
tyle=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8e=
x; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div class=3D"im">On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 17:03, =
Andrei Dombay <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:wikibiophys@gmail.com=
" target=3D"_blank">wikibiophys@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockqu=
ote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204=
); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">

P.S. If you open 20 different accounts from the same computer and IP, all o=
f them will be detected by checkuser when one of the accounts reported. Tha=
t&#39;s what happened with LokiiT. </blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>
Which means that in order for the change-accounts-as-socks strategy to work=
, you&#39;ll have to</div>
<div>1. not open all the accounts at once;</div><div>2. discard the old acc=
ount when opening a new one. =A0Having multiple accounts but not using them=
 together is expressly permitted by the sock policy. =A0Naturally, this pol=
icy doesn&#39;t mean much *but* having multiple accounts and not using them=
 together will significantly reduce the likelihood that somebody might figu=
re out they&#39;re related. =A0And this will mean lower likelihood of check=
user in the first place.</div>

<div><br></div></div><font color=3D"#888888">-- <br>Andres Soolo<br>
</font><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Wikipedia statistics discussion list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net">folks@wikipedometer.net</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks" target=
=3D"_blank">http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>

--0015175ccfbe8c99c1046dd0c713--


--===============7448049366020830149==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia statistics discussion list
folks@wikipedometer.net
http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks

--===============7448049366020830149==--


