[OSM-talk] bot vandalism
aschoell at gmail.com
Mon Oct 12 08:48:47 BST 2009
On 12 Oct 2009, at 24:05 , Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I don't know about the specific case you are talking about. But on
> a more general note, I am sure that we will be seeing stricter rules
> for bots, where instead of *politely asking* for things to be
> discussed before the bot runs & properly documented, we will in the
> future *demand* that this is the case and threaten to suspend bot
> accounts that don't play by the rules, and revert their edits.
this is exactly why I raised this again.
> I don't think that there will be an approval process for bots in the
> near future (simply because of the manpower required for such
we need some process. doesn't have to be formal or same each time.
Just a minimum > 1 user to make such a risky thing like a bot. If a
bot user can't prove this was done and documented it will be blocked
on any user request without waiting for feedback to keep damage under
I am sure there will be at least 5 volunteers to check the concept and
code for each bot if it's posted to talk. Still no guarantee but
fundamental bugs will be fixed before any big damage.
a second step must be a dry run with verification of the changes done.
> We might also ask bot users to flag the relevant accounts as "bot
> accounts", to allow easier filtering on the user side ("I am not
> interested in changes done by bots").
this should be a requirement. maybe we should even monitor accounts
for big edits across the planet in short time and block them
automatically if they are not approved bot accounts.
More information about the talk