Board Thread:Administrators Discussion/@comment-4811793-20130620225343/@comment-3247345-20130622201521

Jessie1010 wrote: Many people do not have emails. Many feel safer as an anon. Many even may have parents/guardians who do not feel comfortable with them having an account. It's pretty easy to get an email too. It's free. You type in some info and bam you have an email. And FYI, you're more anonymous if you make an account since there are sites like this can trace your location based on the IP address that's publicly available when you contribute "anonymously".

Jessie1010 wrote: And my major question is, why are there wikis that have not been affected by this that should? Like the Victorious Wiki, Sam &amp; Cat Wiki, Barney Wiki, ANT Farm Wiki, Phineas and Ferb Wikior even the Dog With a Blog Wiki! Correct me if I'm wrong but I haven't seen any of those wikis addressed and they all fall into the same category as Austin & Ally. Well first off two of those wikis (Victorious and ANT Farm) have already disabled anons for the reasons I've been trying to point out here. The anons totally destroyed the ANT Farm wiki (by vandalizing it and posting X rated comments) and it took a major cleanup operation to make the place look presentable. The Sam and Cat wiki is planning to disable anons as soon as they get enough registered users. I can tell you from talking to them that the admins there recognize what parasites anons can be. I guess they don't share the irrational attachment to letting anons run amok as some do here.

Selenaroxx wrote:

Again, a lot of good points have already been brought up...

I can only really say this:

Okay, yes, so some anons can vandalize, and just because of that, you think all of them leaving will be a positive thing? You could easily say the same thing about users--a few of them cause ruckus on pages, and yet we're not just going to think that assigning the blame to every single person with an account will do any good. It's all perspective--people generally tend to notice the extremely good qualities and/or the extremely dire qualities of a group; in this case, the latter is being done. Speaking from experience I can tell you that anons do more bad than good. 90% of the reverts I've had to do are because of anons. Out of the edits that anons did that I didn't have to outright revert, the vast majority I had to delete something stupid they put in addition to something useful they actually added. In addition, I have had to fix the sloppy spelling/grammar in most edits I didn't have to outright revert because a large number of anons wouldn't know proper spelling/grammar conventions if it bit them in the butt. Plus they're unable to have an intelligent conversation about their moronic edits. They'll just fight with you until an admin intervenes and solves the issue. They always come out wrong in those fights too because they don't know what they're doing. This is much less of an issue for those who care enough to make an account. Getting rid of these parasites would be good for the wiki.

Selenaroxx wrote:

But by eradicating them all, we'll probably only get about 10% anons to make accounts if we're lucky. The reason why? We can't all assume that, oh they can just make an account because everyone surely has an email and everyone surely meets the age limit and everyone surely has the permission to make an account on this wiki. I'm going to stop there because I'm sick of saying surely, but many complications can pop up--just because you can do something doesn't necessarily mean that others have the same privileges. Need I remind you of bigger scales of this example such as first, second, third class, and etc? This seems to be pretty irrelevant to the reason staff are disabling. Keeping people off that are too young to have an account is precisely why staff is disabling anons. For staff it's about not getting hauled into court or fined for violating federal law, not about whether it's a good idea to have anons (which it's not).

Selenaroxx wrote: Alright, I am extremely tired of hearing people say, "Oh, it's a lost cause, you're wasting your time, etc." I'm not going to point fingers; you people know who you are. Because this is not a lost cause--at least, not yet. We still have 8 days (including today) to appeal enough to Wiki Staff enough to at least get a compromise. I keep hearing talks of a compromise but I haven't heard any specifics. It seems staff already deliberated on this and reached a decision. I wouldn't call it a "lost cause" but it doesn't seem like the outcome will be any better (at least for the users that want to keep the parasites around).