Profiling vandalism in Wikipedia: A Schauerian approach to justification
Profiling vandalism in Wikipedia: A Schauerian approach to justification
复制标题
维基百科中的破坏行为剖析：肖尔式的辩护方法
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2016
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
P. D. Laat
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
P. D. Laat
为了打击大规模的破坏行为，英语维基百科开发了一个由人类和机器人执行的监视系统，并得到各种工具的支持。选择要检查的编辑的核心是使用过滤器或配置文件的过程。这种定性是否合理？在仔细阅读了弗雷德里克·绍尔（Frederick Schauer）关于一般规则（1991）和特别剖析（2003）的著作的基础上，我得出了几个结论。因此，编辑选择的有效性、效率和风险规避都大大增加。增加可预测性的论点建议将所有特征分析的细节公开。此外，更先进的反破坏工具的更广泛的分布似乎表明。关于貌相所用的具体尺度，提出了若干批评意见。当巡逻员使用“辅助编辑”工具时，几个功能（匿名，之前警告过）的严重“过度使用”是一个确定的可能性，破坏了配置文件的有效性。建议的简单补救措施是在界面上显示给巡逻者时使所有这些都不可见。最后，关于不仅是辅助编辑工具，但一般的破坏工具，有人认为，匿名功能是一个敏感的类别：匿名者已经有很长一段时间的争议（而更容易破坏）。将它们作为一个特殊类别来定位违反了维基百科所基于的社会契约。因此，该功能是强制性“未充分使用”的候选者：它应该从所有反破坏过滤器和分析算法中被禁止，并且不再作为特殊编辑特征可见。
In order to fight massive vandalism the English-language Wikipedia has developed a system of surveillance which is carried out by humans and bots, supported by various tools. Central to the selection of edits for inspection is the process of using filters or profiles. Can this profiling be justified? On the basis of a careful reading of Frederick Schauer’s books about rules in general (1991) and profiling in particular (2003) I arrive at several conclusions. The effectiveness, efficiency, and risk-aversion of edit selection all greatly increase as a result. The argument for increasing predictability suggests making all details of profiling manifestly public. Also, a wider distribution of the more sophisticated anti-vandalism tools seems indicated. As to the specific dimensions used in profiling, several critical remarks are developed. When patrollers use ‘assisted editing’ tools, severe ‘overuse’ of several features (anonymity, warned before) is a definite possibility, undermining profile efficacy. The easy remedy suggested is to render all of them invisible on the interfaces as displayed to patrollers. Finally, concerning not only assisted editing tools but tools against vandalism generally, it is argued that the anonymity feature is a sensitive category: anons have been in dispute for a long time (while being more prone to vandalism). Targeting them as a special category violates the social contract upon which Wikipedia is based. The feature is therefore a candidate for mandatory ‘underuse’: it should be banned from all anti-vandalism filters and profiling algorithms, and no longer be visible as a special edit trait.