Here is a little userscript for that: http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/151698

I only tested it using the Scriptish extension for Firefox.

To be continued…

It could create unusual/creative sentences, which is good… but also not unnaturally-sounding sentences, which is not that good.

Bien sûr que si, d'une part un apprenant n'a pas forcément les compétences ou le temps nécessaires pour ajouter des phrases correctes, et d'autre part la raison primale pour laquelle tatoeba a été créé, c'est de permettre d'apprendre du vocabulaire dans une langue que l'on apprend.
Tatoeba a besoin de ceux qui ont besoin de tatoeba.

C'est quoi le but ? avoir une superbe base de phrases et la garder précieusement sous clé dans un endroit tenu secret à l'abri de toute contamination par des personnes non préalablement cooptées ?

Je pense que je vais rapporter ce message à TatoebaPeaceKeeper.

Une ligne à coder pour une ligne codée, sinon ce n'est pas juste :D

Ceux qui répondent aux questions des autres ne sont pas forcément les mêmes que ceux qui ajoutent les phrases.
Et les apprenants ne posent pas forcément des questions sur leurs propres phrases.

Afin d'éviter les comportements de certains trolls, consistant à intervenir sans maîtrise du leur sang froid ou des limites du sujet de la discussion, je propose que le droit de s'exprimer fasse l'objet d'un permis à points, par lequel le droit de s'exprimer serait inversement proportionnel au nombre de messages et commentaires non pertinents ou irrespectueux. Les commentaires et les messages du mur pourraient être signalés ; des avertissements puis des sanctions seraient prisent si de nombreuses personnes sont gênées par ceux-ci et qu'il n'y a pas d'évolution positive du comportement de l'auteur.
On pourrait faire trois premiers avertissements gratuits, puis ensuite un message indiquerait qu'il doit attendre (1 * nombre de fois où c'est déjà arrivé avant) journées avant de pouvoir commenter ou écrire sur le mur à nouveau.

Je pense qu'un tel système présenterait le double avantage que les gens qui sont socialement incapable de participer à une discussion pacifique pourront toujours ajouter de nombreuses phrases de qualité, et que Tatoeba bénéficiera d'une ambiance bien plus propice à la collaboration et moins à la fuite des nouveaux membres traumatisés.

Hi guy :o)
Welcome aboard!

Hello and welcome on Tatoeba :o)

Hallo,
Dies ist eine Erklärung des Komitees für die Befreiung von Sätzen.
Bisher haben wir viele Sätze veröffentlicht. Dies ist jedoch nicht genug. Wir müssen gemeinsam weiter! Begleiten Sie uns jetzt.
¡Viva la Revolución!
KBS.

Moi aussi, moi aussi ! :o)
I think I’ll arrive in the 9th afternoon.

Why chose a subject like that to troll about when there are so much better ones… like the Spanish vs Castilian (español vs castellano) one. :oD

I'm so waiting for someone to create a Fred Bloggs account :oD

Ça semble être une bonne idée, alors je fais remonter ce message :o)

This seems to be a good idea, so I push this post up :o)

\o/ Baudelaire… il ne se prend pas pour du pâté le sysko :oP

Que faire ? → Contacter l'un des modérateur par message privé.

>> A sentence on tatoeba is not an article on wikipedia, it's too small to be considered as something made "by the crowd"
The size doesn't matter (I just HAD TO say that ^^).

>> you always have someone who can explain you WHY did he wrote it this way or did he considered the sentences as correct (by adopting it).
I have (at least one) counterexample(s).
But lets come back to the first idea. A sentence is neither simple nor monolithic. I have seen many sentences where there were more than two people contributing (even though most of the time, only one "pushed" the modifications). Usually, the first "contributer", the one that owns the sentence doesn't have anything to do with the following modifications. He just do or do not the changes. I don't see how he is more legit to make the decision than anyone else.

>> I know for some of thes points, we can imagine a "being warned when changed occurs on this sentence" to replace this, but for this, in addition to the fact that tatoeba is not finished, so yep this feature will be great, but ownership was easier to code and is already present, it will not present an other case where ownership can be usefull.
For now, that means only one person at a time can follow a sentence. And the only other way to be noticed (if someone is nice enough to notify the change in the comments) is to leave a comment on the sentence, and then you can't help receiving the messages if you want (and end up disabling the notification I guess). It might have been easier at some point but it is far from perfect.

>> who added it or at least the guys who says "I take care of this sentence" so if it's a well known user (CK for english, Sacredceltic for French etc.) then you already know it's a quite reliable sentence.
Should I come with a counterexample here? (I have some).
Furthermore, isn't is quite unfair? aren't other people sentences as trustworthy as the ones from these "famous" users? and will those last ones left in error?

I'm sorry but I don't get the whole google fight thing…

>> I know that then "you can look on the historic" can be also an answer BUT, going on the historic supposed you to click on the sentence, I know it sounds stupid and lazy, but well when I'm at the pause and seeing some random chinese sentences to learn some stuff, I really don't want to have to click to know that, 80% of the chinese sentences are owned by 3 users which I consider as reliable, so it saves me hundreds of clicks, and when I see a sentence which is from a "unknown user, then and only then I will click on his profile (and once again clicking directly on his profile rather than the sentence and then his profile trough the history save me a click, and a page loading, which is an eternity here)
This is a practical issue (accessibility), not a technical one. Consequently, I think that is not a very good reason and it could be quite easily fixed.
Anyway, the idea I suggested on IRC would solve the problem. In this case, the fact that there would be several versions of the sentence instead of one sentence with a log of modifications : the last version's owner would be the most strongly linked to it (the one you would display in a list of sentences).

Here is my idea again :

There are sentence versions instead of only one sentence with an log.
Users add comments with or without a vote (agree or doesn't agree with the new version).
The new version is accepted or rejected after a number of days depending on the number of comments and the +/- ratio.

User1 adds a sentence
User2 suggests a modification with a comment explaining why
User3 leave a comment asking for more information
User2 answers
User3 says that now she understand and agrees with User2 and vote +
User4 leaves a comment about User2 version and vote -
User1 leaves a comment about User2 version and vote +
User5 do the same
some time pass
the new version is accepted and become the new sentence

So you have to motivate every proposal and vote with a comment. And in case the majority is still wrong there are moderators (or you can suggest the opposite modification with such good explanations and examples that everyone agrees).

PS : your sentence should have a Capital T letter at the beginning and a final dot at the end (then you can add it without getting any trouble :oP).

Maybe I should wait until Wednesday to say that, but I'm quite playing against the rules as (most of) my (few) sentences are free.
I'm still not convinced that an owned sentence is more reliable than a free one (all the more so new sentences are owned by default), while it is less easy/quickly corrected.
Still it would be nice to check the one with "- date unknown" as first log in their history, comment them or even adopt them if you really want it :o)