Compendium of Kromm Quotes

[David Latapie]

I beg to differ.

Wiki = some administrative work at the beginning, almost none after that. From a company point of view, this is a fire-and-forget strategy. You get extra employees for no money. Free extra trafic, free knowledge base...

A wiki has mostly the same advantages as a forum (except that forum emphasizes traffic where wiki emphasize content). Both are free lunch for companies, since the community is not asking for any salary to do the job.

We just have to convince SJG about this.

[Rasputin]

Originally Posted by Grouchy Chris

That's asking SJG to take on a lot of administrative work, and the wiki has yet to demonstrate that it's all that useful.

Yes for the first statement, though again, this might be best tied to the fora, cutting this down. For the second, however, there have been at least three GURPS wikis that have cropped up since 4e, and that's off the top of my head. There is demand. Right now, there's the wiki referenced, and Jürgen's; that's plenty of redundant work, and keeping them separate from the SJG site cuts down on the visibility to potential contributors.

[David Latapie]

I agree wholeheartedly. For tying them down, surely a SSO solution would allow using forum credentials on the wiki.

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by David Latapie

I beg to differ.

Wiki = some administrative work at the beginning, almost none after that. From a company point of view, this is a fire-and-forget strategy. You get extra employees for no money. Free extra trafic, free knowledge base...

A wiki has mostly the same advantages as a forum (except that forum emphasizes traffic where wiki emphasize content). Both are free lunch for companies, since the community is not asking for any salary to do the job.

We just have to convince SJG about this.

I'll have to disagree with you, there a huge task that Wikia admins are doing for the GURPS wiki, Spam fighting.

[David Latapie]

So is Wikipedia. But this is done by the fans.

An easy way to fix it is what phpBB3 is doing: add a custom semantic captcha whose answer is always the same and can't be easily defeated.

On my forum, I ask a question that can't be solved just by reading the question (contrary to mathematical captcha). Since the answer is always the same, the user's browser can remember it and so disturbance is minimal for the user (in any case, the user should remember the answer after typing it three times...)

Sure, it requires coding a part of the wiki, but that should be easy for the webmaster.

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by David Latapie

An easy way to fix it is what phpBB3 is doing: add a custom semantic captcha whose answer is always the same and can't be easily defeated.

All Captcha are easily defeated the major spammers have set up porn games where they feed the player the next captcha to a player who has to "break it" to get their next picture.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

All Captcha are easily defeated the major spammers have set up porn games where they feed the player the next captcha to a player who has to "break it" to get their next picture.

There's also mechanical turk services and the like for the same goals.

[David Latapie]

To fix this, ask a question which answer is well-known in the community, but not elsewhere.

For instance: "what does U stands for in GURPS" (G is a bad idea, because it could be either General or Generic"). Sure, the answer is on Wikipedia, but I doubt spammer will spend that much time on this (YMMV).

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by David Latapie

To fix this, ask a question which answer is well-known in the community, but not elsewhere.

For instance: "what does U stands for in GURPS" (G is a bad idea, because it could be either General or Generic"). Sure, the answer is on Wikipedia, but I doubt spammer will spend that much time on this (YMMV).

Actually yes they wound, there is a certain amount of configuration you need to do to a spambot to target a new site, as something like that, especial when it the same question ever time is very easy and very worth it to them

Make the question harder and you're putting a big sign new members unwelcome

[vicky_molokh]

How about requiring a minimum number of posts AND account age on this forum to get wiki editing rights automatically. With the ability to bypass the requirement with the approval from a senior member?