RFC: Revised Code of Conduct for bots

Tags: #<Tag:0x00007f0509810938> #<Tag:0x00007f0509810780> #<Tag:0x00007f0509810578> #<Tag:0x00007f05098103c0> #<Tag:0x00007f0509810208>


As per last Monday’s #MetaBrainz meeting I have made a revised version of the Bot Code of Conduct:


The changes from the current Bot CoC can be seen in the diff at https://gist.github.com/Freso/980691714a227fc1a872b4fe1873106f/revisions?short_path=87337e5#diff-87337e52ce092a8321c37ab963b437c4

We will ratify the updated Bot CoC at next Monday’s #MetaBrainz meeting (18th of April), so please voice any concerns or questions before then. :slight_smile:

Notes from #MetaBrainz Meeting on 2016-04-18
Notes from #MetaBrainz Meeting on 2016-04-11

the bot’s user page must at minimum list … where the bot is hosted or run from.

This requirement is rather unclear: Does it refer to the country? City? Street address? Or the hosting provider? The IP address? Something else? Furthermore, I don’t see why that should be necessary or beneficial.

Bots themselves are not allowed to vote on any edits (to be implemented via code).

This has never been implemented, and last time it came up, it was more or less consensus that implementing a bot-check in the voting routines isn’t necessary. I therefore propose to drop the parenthesized clause.

Notes from #MetaBrainz Meeting on 2016-04-11

Ping: @Zas.

I know it has never been implemented; the parenthesis links to the ticket for implementing it (which is open). I can’t remember any discussion for it, but I also do think personally that it should be implemented.

Regardless, it wasn’t part of the rewrite, but I’ll bring it up for tonight’s meeting and ask whether that should be included in the rewrite or not.


Whatever the plan (to implement or not to implement), I don’t think the notice belongs into the CoC – implementing the check is not something the bot is supposed to do.


IP or hostname. If more than one bot of a kind run, it can help us to differentiate them and eventually block unregistered ones. Also in case of suspicious activity it will permit faster identification from logs.


This still doesn’t make any sense to me.

Sorry I have to ask this, but are you aware we are speaking about bots here, that have their own user accounts with password and everything? It sounds like you may be confusing it with userscripts that can run in many different people’s browsers and submit edits under their respective owner’s identity.


Oh well, i shouldn’t answer anything before first coffee i guess, that doesn’t make sense to me either :wink: I guess the “where” question doesn’t make sense in this context anyway.


I have updated the CoC:


Changes from last revision:

  • Parenthesis about bot voting restriction being implemented in code was removed.
  • Requirement to show where the bot was run from was dropped.

See changes here: https://gist.github.com/Freso/980691714a227fc1a872b4fe1873106f/revisions

We will ratify the new document at tonight’s meeting at 19 UTC in #metabrainz on Freenode IRC.