I have had a number of posts defaced by anonymous, unregistered users through the use of proposed edits, though luckily these have been picked up and rejected by community members every time. I wonder, though, whether there is any value in allowing anonymous, unregistered users to propose edits at all.

  • 2
    Edits from anonymous (and low-rep) users have to be reviewed. Our reviewers are catching these, right? (Not an answer to your question; I just want to check on this.) Oct 11 '18 at 22:20
  • 2
    Every single one has been caught, @Monica, our team does a great job
    – Josh K
    Oct 11 '18 at 22:22
  • 1
    Only SE staff would have real data about the signal to noise ratio here. Hopefully they'll respond here.
    – Double AA Mod
    Oct 12 '18 at 1:31
  • 1
    Anonymous is not the issue - many users are anonymous on SE. Unregistered is the issue and I agree with you there it is odd unregistered users can edit posts. Maybe experience shows that, since the bar to register is very low, people who want to deface posts will do it as well if they need to register. The bar to edit without review is actually quite high (2000 points)
    – mbloch
    Oct 12 '18 at 3:15
  • 1
    We don't have good tools to review these, but a fellow mod on a different site is seeing what he can put together to improve the tools we do have. Oct 12 '18 at 3:24
  • 2
    See this StackApps post by Samuel Liew for a userscript that makes it easier to look through rejected edits. In the last few days we've had 15 anonymous vandalizing edits. We had a similar attack in May. Otherwise they're infrequent. (I'm just reporting data, not drawing conclusions.) Oct 14 '18 at 4:29

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .