User:Jayjg has apparently been missing from Wikipedia since August 4th
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jayjg, shortly
before an ArbComm in which he is named as a party formally opened.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Allegations…
Perhaps also not coincidentally, one of the other editors named in the
case, User:Urthogie, has also disappeared without a trace.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Urthogie
Unlike Urthogie, Jayjg is a trusted user and admin who has access to
tools such as Oversight and Checkuser and is also on the ArbComm
mailing list as a former member of that body. He's well aware of the
custom of announcing when you are on "Wikibreak" or "Wikiholiday" but
has not posted any such announcement.
Further, he is also now at the center of a very serious allegation
that he misused his Oversight tools in order to coverup an old
incident of abusive sockpuppetry by one of his friends
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incide…
The Sockpuppet case is old and evidently occurred when SV was still a
new editor though, given that she used an "alternate account" to
support her main account on various pages including "double voting" in
the instance of a Featured Article nomination, it would have been nice
had she simply publicly admitted her mistake and apologized. Instead,
she has sent out private emails explaining away the "alternate
account" by saying wikipedia was different then, she was new and her
double voting was simply a "mistake". I think we can excuse an old
mistake but a bit of contrition would have been nice.
In any case, the real problem is not SV's sockpuppetry but Jayjg's
agreement, in the past year, to coverup any evidence of this by
oversighting various edits.
Several respected editors have expressed concern about Jay's behavior
in the ANI discussion:
Gmaxwell: "Except it's already been before Arbcom and it appears that
they failed us. When oversight was first introduced the logs were
public. I noticed Jayjg's mass over-sighting of seemingly harmless
edits like spelling corrections with an summary of "pi". I brought the
issue up with Brion, who thought it looked odd so he temporally
removed oversight from Jayjg. [23]. Arbcom looked at the issue, and
apparently decided that it was all okay. Jay's access was restored,
the revisions stayed oversighted, and he continued mass over-sighting
old edits like these. I trusted then. Having seen the evidence I think
it would be unwise to extend the same trust again. --Gmaxwell 03:03,
25 August 2007 (UTC)"
"Although Sarah's actions are old enough to be uninteresting, as Dan
pointed out above, the possible appearance of coverup is very
interesting and important and should be fully resolved." (Gmaxwell)
Thatcher131: "Overly aggressive use of oversight by Jayjg was brought
up privately as an issue when oversight was first instituted, but the
concerns were apparently dismissed. This should be looked into again."
Jayjg really needs to explain himself but he has evidently decided to
abandon wikipedia, at least for the period of the ArbCom case against
him. Apart from an initial post opposing the ArbComm taking on the
case he has made no contribution to the ArbComm case, not to the
Workshop or Evidence page. In the past admins who have failed to
participate in an ArbComm case involving them have been desysopped.
Given Jayjg's unexplained absence, his failure to respond to one
ArbCom case against him, the serious questions that exist considering
his use of Oversight in another matter and the possibility that an
account that has quite a number of tools attached has been abandoned
and may be usurped by a hacker I'm wondering whether anything will be
done? Will Jayjg be desysopped and have his tools removed (and be
unsubscribed from ArbComm-L) at least as a precaution until he returns
and explains himself? Will he be deemed to have abdicated his
responsibilities by refusing to respond to an ArbComm case against him
and refusing to explain the Oversight situation?
At the very least Jimbo should direct the ArbComm to examine Jay's
possible abuse of his Oversight tools and investigate other possible
abuses. The dereliction of duty by a senior admin is a serious
problem which should not be swept under the carpet or overlooked.
Doing so only further damages Wikipedia's credibility in a year in
which we have taken a number of serious blows.