Board Thread:New Features/@comment-5275700-20150722200934/@comment-1279279-20150809220021

Probably most registered users were IP users for a while before they 'converted' - and it could be argued that certain users are 'registered under their IP name.'

One question that should be asked is - what were the circumstances that gave rise to anonymous editing being disabled?

Probably by definition those wikis which do not block anonymous editing are in a position where IPs act in a way that is neutral, adds to 'the enjoyment, use or development of the wiki' or can be managed by those present (with occasional help from passing VSTF members).

Another question - what proportion of wikis have disputes between registered users/RU making 'silly and trivial changes' (eg changing between UK and US spellings on wikis that are not orientated to either country), or have 'administrators and others' attempting to impose their point of view. (I have come across a wiki where the administrator protected #every last page# from development by anyone else - rather than semi-protecting those few pages which were likely to be subject to negative activity.)

There is a case for disabling anonymous users on certain wikis on Wikia (and elsewhere) - but 'for the majority of wikis where general participation is expected' what should be the procedure? Should there be a several stage process (with page protection and other options being explored first); and should it be time limited or permanent?