Wikipedia talk:Bots/Opt-out

No problems from me

As long as the second sentence from BC's opt-out, that restricts the communication of those wishing to opt out, isn't readded, I've no problems with the current construct. Bellwether ^B_C 23:06, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

As I said on the MFD, the sentence did not originate from BC, it originated from me. But I agree with the sentence being removed so this should be fine now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt and helpful response to this. The amended text seems to me to perfectly fair. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:13, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

As long as this can elevate problems, I don't mind doing stuff like this. Your welcome. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 06:26, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

This is a really really simple approach, and maybe that's all that's needed, but I'd still like to see something a bit more fine tunable. An example of something I'd be more inclined to support is at User:Locke Cole/Bot Page Exclusion. My major concern is opting out of all messages from a bot that performs multiple tasks. —Locke Cole • t • c 06:31, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

This is not specific towards Betacommand bot; this focuses on every single bot that runs. That was my goal in mind is for people who refuse to deal with bots ever. I am not sure how this will affect AWB or Twinkle at all. We got time to hammer this out. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 06:39, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

If it's something that will be required of all bots, simpler is better. I like the idea behind this page (I liked the old version, too, but this one I like a lot more.). The more complicated you make a system, intended to be used by programs, the more problems will occur, generally. SQL^{Query me!} 07:49, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

True, but there's probably also a minimum feature set we should aim for. Carnildo already weighed in on my page at Wikipedia talk:Bot policy and seemed to indicate implementing my proposal would be fairly simple using regular expressions. What are your thoughts? —Locke Cole • t • c 08:00, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, there is a minimum featureset needed. I believe that what's required, should probably be decided on a case-by-case basis. I think, at this point, it's best to start at the bottom. Seperate bots into two categories, Urgent, and non-urgent. Urgent bots (Arbcom notifications, antivandal, and whatnot), should likely ignore this page's userlist. Non-Urgent, should have to explicitly request and demonstrate a need to bypass user opt-out, as a part of the BRFA process. That is, if there has to be a mandatory opt-out. I'm still somewhat torn on how I feel about forcing mandatory opt-out on what might be hundreds of "legacy bots", which may not even be maintained anymore, but, are nonetheless useful. It's been a long day off-wiki, I hope this makes sense... SQL^{Query me!} 08:35, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I already gave ArbCom notifications as an exception to this page, since notification is a requirement to even starting an ArbCom. Even though working on fair use images is considered an urgent task to the Foundation, it is the notices about the image is what even bringing all of us to this point. Plus, everyone will consider their bots urgent to do x, y and z. I am not worried about the legacy bots, since this list is also voluntary for bot runners (at my in my view, until consensus rules otherwise). I think we should have a section of what bots have agreed to this list, then a list below of what users don't want a notice. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 08:55, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

My proposal also wasn't specifically intended for BetacommandBot. =) I have no problem with certain messages on my talk page, but certain messages I'd rather not be bothered with. —Locke Cole • t • c 08:00, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea what other people's feelings about the bots are, so that is why I made it as short and simple as this. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 08:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Early history and MfD under previous title

For the record, this page started life in userspace at User:Zscout370/Botoptout. There was an MfD at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Zscout370/Botoptout where the move to Wikipedia:Bots/Opt-out was suggested. This seems to have resolved most problems some people had with the page. Hopefully further discussion will now continue about whether this opt-out system should become part of bot policy. Carcharoth (talk) 00:31, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Still an active proposal?

Just trying to clean up Category:Wikipedia proposals so wondering if this is still an active proposal or if it can be tagged otherwise? Hiding T 09:37, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Go ahead and mark it as inactive/failed. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 19:22, 25 August 2009 (UTC)