[WikiEN-l] Re: Arbitration Committee members granted checkuser tool

[Autymn D.C.]

On 13 Nov 2005, at 07.10, BJörn Lindqvist wrote:
> Hi Anthere
>
>> Checks should be done only on accounts doing abusive edits to 
>> Wikipedia
>> (vandalism, insults, spam, defaming etc...)
>> If checks are done without any relevant reasons related to abuse, then
>> those checks are abusive and the person with the checkuser access 
>> should
>> (will) lose it.
>
> Just like admins wrongfully blocking accounts are also supposed to
> have their admin status revoked? Please realize that the two actions
> have very different worst cases.
>
> Blocking: Worst case: You do not get to write in Wikipedia for a while.

/No/, you did not heed my email about my situation.  The worst case is 
that one person is blocked who is the only person that can spot and fix 
mistakes in articles that are getting more exposure, and that can 
dispel wrong and harmful comments in the talk pages.  The longer the 
absence, the more that readers will think that the last word is true, 
when the qualified party is kept from having it.  The wrongful policers 
must be punished for disrupting communications.

-Aut