Restoring the original content is a bit tricky with the ALU CLiki, which does not currently provide links to previous page versions. I seem to remember that such links used to be available.
If enough Lispers from all over the world and time zones check the sites, we may be able to reduce the effectiveness of spam, or at least raise the cost of producing it.
Paolo Amoroso <amor...@mclink.it> wrote: > Restoring the original content is a bit tricky with the ALU CLiki, > which does not currently provide links to previous page versions. I > seem to remember that such links used to be available.
> If enough Lispers from all over the world and time zones check the > sites, we may be able to reduce the effectiveness of spam, or at least > raise the cost of producing it.
Lisp folks with WikiClues are also, of course, invited to contribute to the growing Wikipedia articles on the subject, including:
(Or, of course, the non-English Wikipedias' articles on the same subject....)
-- Karl A. Krueger <kkrue...@example.edu> { s/example/whoi/ }
Every program has at least one bug and can be shortened by at least one line. By induction, every program can be reduced to one line which does not work.
On 2004-12-17 17:18:24 +0100, Paolo Amoroso <amor...@mclink.it> said:
> Restoring the original content is a bit tricky with the ALU CLiki, > which does not currently provide links to previous page versions. I > seem to remember that such links used to be available.
They are not available but you can append ?v=x , where x the the version, to the url.
Engelke Eschner <enge...@tekai.org> writes: > On 2004-12-17 17:18:24 +0100, Paolo Amoroso <amor...@mclink.it> said:
>> Restoring the original content is a bit tricky with the ALU CLiki, >> which does not currently provide links to previous page versions. I >> seem to remember that such links used to be available.
> They are not available but you can append ?v=x , where x the the
> Restoring the original content is a bit tricky with the ALU CLiki, > which does not currently provide links to previous page versions. I > seem to remember that such links used to be available.
> If enough Lispers from all over the world and time zones check the > sites, we may be able to reduce the effectiveness of spam, or at least > raise the cost of producing it.
I've no idea whether that's a spammer-detection procedure that's likely to work usefully in the future, but it doesn't seem unlikely. (If it works for a few months, then probably it's worthwhile.)
Paolo Amoroso wrote: > From time to time, CLiki site are flooded by spam. This is currently > the case for the ALU CLiki, as you can see from the change log:
The obvious solution that reduces spam consists of measures that are implemented on various online systems:
Before creating content, users are ``authenticated'' to an e-mail address by creating a password-protected account that is activated by responding to an e-mail and responding to an image-understanding challenge.
Whenever submitting new public content, users must be logged in to an activated account, and additionally respond to an image-understanding challenge.
> Whenever submitting new public content, users must be logged in to an > activated account, and additionally respond to an image-understanding > challenge.
>> On 2004-12-17 17:18:24 +0100, Paolo Amoroso <amor...@mclink.it> said:
>>> Restoring the original content is a bit tricky with the ALU CLiki, >>> which does not currently provide links to previous page versions. I >>> seem to remember that such links used to be available.
>> They are not available but you can append ?v=x , where x the the
Stefan Scholl <ste...@no-spoon.de> writes: > On 2004-12-18 02:08:42, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> > Whenever submitting new public content, users must be logged in to an > > activated account, and additionally respond to an image-understanding > > challenge.
> That wouldn't be a wiki anymore.
The image-understanding challenge by itself may be enough to eliminate automated spam. Although I don't think that is friendly to blind people or people who have images turned off.
How about if you just ask, "Are you a human?" If the answer is "yes", they can update the page. If the answer is "no", they can't.
-- An ideal world is left as an excercise to the reader. --- Paul Graham, On Lisp 8.1
David Steuber wrote: > Stefan Scholl <ste...@no-spoon.de> writes: > > On 2004-12-18 02:08:42, Kaz Kylheku wrote: > > > Whenever submitting new public content, users must be > > > logged in to an activated account, and additionally > > > respond to an image-understanding challenge.
> > That wouldn't be a wiki anymore.
> The image-understanding challenge by itself may be enough to > eliminate automated spam. Although I don't think that is > friendly to blind people or people who have images turned off.
> How about if you just ask, "Are you a human?" If the answer is > "yes", they can update the page. If the answer is "no", they can't.
Just so you guys don't waste your time on this in vain, the ALU wiki problem has nothing (nada, zero) to do with technical issues. Paolo probably knows this, and suggested the only obvious solution.
I personally do not think Lisp users should feel at all responsible to contribute labor to this wiki unless they are honestly told the specifics of why this spam is an issue. I'm not dissing Paolo, I think he's just being polite when faced with a totally bullshit situation. MfG, Tayssir
Karl A. Krueger wrote: > Paolo Amoroso <amor...@mclink.it> wrote: > > Restoring the original content is a bit tricky with the ALU CLiki, > > which does not currently provide links to previous page versions. > > I seem to remember that such links used to be available.
> > If enough Lispers from all over the world and time zones check the > > sites, we may be able to reduce the effectiveness of spam, or at > > least raise the cost of producing it.
> Lisp folks with WikiClues are also, of course, invited to contribute > to the growing Wikipedia articles on the subject, including:
I've always been unhappy with descriptions of sexps; they seem to get lost in technical descriptions of cons cells, and obscure the point. So I wrote much of this: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?EssExpressions Perhaps I can tidy something like it up for Wikipedia.
