Sure. I absolutely hate that “anonymous” edits aren’t actually anonymous, and you basically need a user account to not get insta-reverted. It would be pretty cool if they had a trust system where untrusted edits go to an approval queue or something and you gradually build up trust by not doing graffiti everywhere.
I’d like to make anonymous edits to WP and personally resent their lack of accommodation of that. But I don’t have a very solid proposal as to how it could be done. So must forgive them.
You’d need some kind of account system, but you could probably get away with just signing your edits. If the same key is used to sign an edit, then it can be considered the same “user” even if there’s no persistent account associated w/ it. You’d need to register a public key, but that’s about it.
Wikipedia has been doxing their own editors for decades. Heritage is just using the public data. They’re still fash but wikipedia isn’t much better.
Sure. I absolutely hate that “anonymous” edits aren’t actually anonymous, and you basically need a user account to not get insta-reverted. It would be pretty cool if they had a trust system where untrusted edits go to an approval queue or something and you gradually build up trust by not doing graffiti everywhere.
How would that work without accounts?
I’d like to make anonymous edits to WP and personally resent their lack of accommodation of that. But I don’t have a very solid proposal as to how it could be done. So must forgive them.
You’d need some kind of account system, but you could probably get away with just signing your edits. If the same key is used to sign an edit, then it can be considered the same “user” even if there’s no persistent account associated w/ it. You’d need to register a public key, but that’s about it.