<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 4:46 PM, wren ng thornton <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:wren@freegeek.org" target="_blank">wren@freegeek.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">On 7/30/12 5:35 PM, Henk-Jan van Tuyl wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
- Block creation of usernames<br>
o ending with two or more digits<br>
o with more than one x or q<br>
o starting with "buy"<br>
o longer than 20 characters<br>
o with more than 4 consonants in a row<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
As other's've mentioned, many of these constraints impose undue burden on users with linguistic heritage outside of western Europe. Creating a decent filter for recognizing legitimate names across the majority of languages is quite difficult.<br>
<br>
Though there's no reason this has to be a strong blacklisting of usernames. If there's a willing volunteer (as seems to have been implied), then something like this could serve as a filter requiring manual override. All usernames are available... but some take longer to activate. Of course, there's always the power-to-weight issue for this kind of solution.</blockquote>
<div><br></div><div>Yeah, I volunteered. I'd like to see some kind of random round-robin system to dispatch approval edits to a group of volunteers (i.e., if I only had to scan 10 or so edits for spam a day -- I don't feel inclined to read for correctness). It wouldn't be so bad if there was 10-20 volunteers. I suppose a lot less could do it if it was just approving user requests (but, I also think that would be less effective at stopping spam)</div>
</div>