If it's made private, the sender should be allowed to retain a copy, either on email or somewhere else. (BTW, I hugely dislike the idea of private inboxes and the like being embedded in MediaWiki.)

swalling wrote:

(In reply to comment #1)

If it's made private, the sender should be allowed to retain a copy, either
on
email or somewhere else. (BTW, I hugely dislike the idea of private inboxes
and
the like being embedded in MediaWiki.)

You mean private inboxes like your watchlist?

</trolling> ;)

(In reply to comment #2)

You mean private inboxes like your watchlist?

There's nothing private in Special:Watchlist, we've already had this conversation.
I'll note that e.g. Panoramio has a private message feature which stores all messages in your email box but nowhere in their interface that I can see.

Shouldn't this be in the Wikimedia/Site requests component? You can easily use $wgThanksLogging to turn logging on or off, and I can't think of any reason why you would want to remove functionality that from the extension.

swalling wrote:

(In reply to comment #4)

Shouldn't this be in the Wikimedia/Site requests component? You can easily
use
$wgThanksLogging to turn logging on or off, and I can't think of any reason
why
you would want to remove functionality that from the extension.

Good call. Done.

(now that the bug is in Site requests, making bug summary less generic, we're not going to remove all MediaWiki logging)

(In reply to comment #0)

If we do turn off all public logging of thanks actions, we should consult
with all the communities that currently use Thanks, and gauge their reaction.

Indeed. Not a fun task.

(In reply to comment #1)

If it's made private, the sender should be allowed to retain a copy, either
on email or somewhere else.

I think it would be a good thing to provide a complete, private thanks-received history to each user, that could be blanked or have entries removed in the same manner as browser history.

Oh - I also think we should have a user group (akin to CheckUsers) with the ability to look at a user's thanks activity if they have reasonable suspicion that the facility is being abused. Such inspections should of course be logged and taken very seriously, just as CheckUser is.

However, I don't know if it ever has been abused to an extent that would require engineering of that grade. If the idea is found acceptable, perhaps it could be put on a back burner (filed as a separate bug?) with somebody ready to jump on it should an actual need prevent itself.

swalling wrote:

(In reply to comment #1)

If it's made private, the sender should be allowed to retain a copy, either
on
email or somewhere else. (BTW, I hugely dislike the idea of private inboxes
and
the like being embedded in MediaWiki.)

The contents of thanks notifications are the same every single time, so there is no individual "copy" to retain. The interface shows you that you thanked someone for an edit, and the user in question receives via Web or email, depending on their personal preferences.

How are thanks notifications different from mention notifications?

swalling wrote:

(In reply to comment #11)

How are thanks notifications different from mention notifications?

Mentions are created via a link in a wiki page. They're more public actions, because even if you don't see the notification generated, you can see that someone's userpage was linked to. Thanks are generated only via clicking the "thank" button on a diff or history page, next to undo. For these and all notifications, you are not privy to whether someone received the notification or not. The other difference is that the "thank" button is created via a separate extension, while mentions are built in to Echo.

That's pretty much it, to talk about it at a very high level.

[[mw:Principles]].