From c58845c56a8a7f3a1ee125ec9bd4a1b26e87d59f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Lyudmila Vaseva <vaseva@mi.fu-berlin.de>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 13:00:56 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Move notes on filters usage and creation to chap5
---
meeting-notes/20190613.md | 2 +-
thesis/5-Overview-EN-Wiki.tex | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/meeting-notes/20190613.md b/meeting-notes/20190613.md
index fac80cf..e27d0a8 100644
--- a/meeting-notes/20190613.md
+++ b/meeting-notes/20190613.md
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@
** an older filter is split?
** several older filters are merged?
** or functionality of an older filter is took and extended in a newer one (479->631); (82->278)
- ** new condition(s) are tested and then merged into existing filter : stuff from 292 was merged to 135 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/history/135/diff/prev/4408 ; following the comments from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/292 it was not conceived as a test filter though, but it was rather merged in 135 post-factum to save conditions); 440 was merged into 345
+ ** new condition(s) are tested and then merged into existing filter : stuff from 292 was merged to 135 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/history/135/diff/prev/4408 , also from 366; following the comments from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/292 it was not conceived as a test filter though, but it was rather merged in 135 post-factum to save conditions); 440 was merged into 345
** an incident caught repeatedly by a filter motivates the creation of a dedicated filter (994)
* How stable is the filter maker community?
diff --git a/thesis/5-Overview-EN-Wiki.tex b/thesis/5-Overview-EN-Wiki.tex
index 4362eb2..d73122c 100644
--- a/thesis/5-Overview-EN-Wiki.tex
+++ b/thesis/5-Overview-EN-Wiki.tex
@@ -461,6 +461,43 @@ Multiple filters have the comment "let's see whether this hits something", which
%We can sort filters into categories along various criteria.
%For now we don't have a different criteria...
+\section{Patterns in filters creation and usage}
+* What are typical filter usage patterns?
+ ** switched on for a while, then deactivated and never activated again?: 81 (bad charts), 167 (two brief disables underway), 302 (switched off on the grounds of insufficient activity)
+ ** switched on for a short while and then powered down: mostly stuff merged to other filters; or for which the community decides filter is not an appropriate solution (308); or decides to not implement the thing (that way); 290 (disabled, since relevant pages were protected)
+ ** or switched off after a short while because there were no hits: 304, 67, 122
+ ** or switched off after a longer while, because it was not tripped frequently, in order to save conditions from the condition limit: 211 ("Disable, appears to be inactive (log only filter). If you are using this filter, please let me know, and I'll reenable it -Prodego")
+ ** switched off bc merged to another filter 440 was merged in 345
+ ** switched on and still on: 11 (verify), 79 (with brief periods of being disabled for couple of minutes/hours, probably in order to update the pattern), 164, 642 (if we ignore the 2min period it was disabled on 13.4.2018), 733 (2.11.2015-present), 29 (18.3.2009-present), 30 (18.3.2009-present), 33 (18.3.2009-present), 39 (18.3.2009-present), 50 (18.3.2009-present), 59 (19.3.2009-present), 80 (22.3.2009-present)
+ ** switched on for a while, deactivated for a while, activated again?: 61, 98 (was deactivated briefly since an editor found the "warn" action unfounded; re-enabled to tag), 148 ("20160213 - disabled - possible technical issue - see edit filter noticeboard - xaosflux")
+ ** switched on and stayed on, with the exception of brief periods of time when the filter was deactivated (and the activated again), probably in order to update the conditions: 79, 135 (there were couple of others in Shirik's list, go back and look);
+ ** irregular?
+
+* What do filters target: general behaviour vs edits by single users
+ ** there are quite some filters targeting particular users: 290 (targets an IP range)
+ ** there are also some targetting particular pages (verify!), although this clashed with the guidelines
+ ** and there are some filtering in general
+ ** there are also filters such as 199 (Unflagged bots) which were implemented in order to track something which was not quite malicious or abusive and were thus deemed inappropriate use of filters by the community and consequently (quite swiftly) deleted
+ ** some target insults in general and some contain regexes containing very specifically insults directed towards edit filter managers (see filter 12)
+
+* How do filters emerge?
+ ** an older filter is split?
+ ** several older filters are merged?
+ ** or functionality of an older filter is took and extended in a newer one (479->631); (82->278)
+ ** new condition(s) are tested and then merged into existing filter : stuff from 292 was merged to 135 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/history/135/diff/prev/4408 , also from 366; following the comments from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/292 it was not conceived as a test filter though, but it was rather merged in 135 post-factum to save conditions); 440 was merged into 345
+ ** an incident caught repeatedly by a filter motivates the creation of a dedicated filter (994)
+
+* How stable is the filter maker community?
+ ** how many new users have become part of it over time?
+ ** Has it been the same people from the very beginning?
+ ** are there a couple of very active edit filter managers, that are also (informal) leaders?
+ ** Do edit filter managers specialize on particular types of filters (e.g. vandalism vs good faith?)
+
+* How are filter actions set
+ ** there's this pattern that all actions but logging (which cannot be switched off) are took out, when edit filter managers are updating the regex of the filter
+ ** there's a tendency of editors to hide filters just for the heck of it (at least there are never clear reasons given), which is then reverted by other editors with the comment that it is not needed: 148, 225 (consesus that general vandalism filters should be public [Special:Permalink/784131724#Privacy of general vandalism filters), 260 (similar to 225), 285 (same), 12 (same), 39 (unhidden with the comment "made filter public again - these edits are generally made by really unsophisticated editors who barely know how to edit a page. --zzuuzz")
+ ** oftentimes, when a hidden filter is marked as "deleted" it is made public
+
\section{Public and Hidden Filters}
The first noticeable typology is along the line public/private filters.
--
GitLab