[WikiEN-l] Arbitration Committee members granted checkuser tool

[David Gerard]

geni wrote:
>On 11/13/05, Kelly Martin <kelly.lynn.martin at gmail.com> wrote:

>> Public perception is not required.

>However it normaly exists. I can't at short notice think of any cases
>involveing it's use where no one had raised any questions.


You have that backwards: the cases are already questionable, then I do
a checkuser. There are lots and lots and lots you don't see.

Read the FAQ I just posted: Q. Why aren't there public logs?


- d.