Correct, as it has to. In addition to behavior, CheckUsers use IP addresses to help identify sockpuppets. If you could bypass the exemption by just saying “here’s a new account; pls exempt”, it would quickly become common knowledge among sockmasters that all they need is to quickly ask and be accepted days later.
At that point, the block on proxy editing near-completely fails at one of its main functions.
I’d disagree with the notion “it has to”. The chilling effect on a large number of new wiki contributors could be considered more detrimental than weakening sock puppet protection. (IE if a huge country suddenly started jailing people who make edits not considered state-approved)
I suspect there are plenty of ways to allow new accounts to make edits on a smaller subset of articles until they have passed some threshold of trust which could minimize the sock puppet abuse.
That’s a catch-22 for good faith new contributors, of course
Correct, as it has to. In addition to behavior, CheckUsers use IP addresses to help identify sockpuppets. If you could bypass the exemption by just saying “here’s a new account; pls exempt”, it would quickly become common knowledge among sockmasters that all they need is to quickly ask and be accepted days later.
At that point, the block on proxy editing near-completely fails at one of its main functions.
I’d disagree with the notion “it has to”. The chilling effect on a large number of new wiki contributors could be considered more detrimental than weakening sock puppet protection. (IE if a huge country suddenly started jailing people who make edits not considered state-approved)
I suspect there are plenty of ways to allow new accounts to make edits on a smaller subset of articles until they have passed some threshold of trust which could minimize the sock puppet abuse.
Point is everything is a give and take.
Of course. It’s probably the lesser of two evils, but is unfortunate regardless