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

[Carbonite]

On 11/14/05, Anthere <Anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Carbonite wrote:
> > On 11/14/05, Anthere <Anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>In case you are not aware of it, Yahoo recently helped the chinese
> >>government to uncover a chinese "dissident" and this lead the guy to
> >>prison. Have no doubts that some of our participants, in particular
> >>those from certain regions, or those participating to wikinews, are at
> >>the same amount of risk. *You* could yourself directly endanger a life
> >>in giving private information. I hope that in spite that you do not
> >>receive a sufficient financial compensation, you will be careful. I
> >>think feeling less responsability due to the fact you are not paid is
> >>not a very good approach of the tool.
> >
> >
> > If someone's life or family is endangered by editing Wikipedia, they
> should
> > immediately stop. Seriously, if a user is in a situation where they'll
> lose
> > their job, freedom or life because of what they contribute to a website,
> > they need to take responsibility for themselves and cease all editing.
> Of
> > course we need to protect the privacy of all editors, and I fully
> support
> > removal of checkuser access for anyone who misuses the tool. However,
> > ultimately it up to the every user to ensure they're not putting
> themselves
> > at risk.
> > Carbonite
>
> I disagree with you Carbonite.
>
> And probably do all those who ever risked anything precious to support
> freedom.
>
> In memory of all those who became unofficial soldiers to liberate their
> country from a hostile invador.
> In memory of those who risked their lives to hide jews in their caves
> during WWII.
> In memory of women who were burned as witches for saving poor girls from
> an unwanted pregnancy.
> In memory of dissidents who lost their lives to ask for independance.
> In memory of journalists who died covering a war to provide *you* with
> information.
> In memory of encyclopedists who were exiled or put in jail for trying to
> publish enlightned encyclopedia de Diderot.
>
> Some people put the public good over their own private well-being. We
> have nothing to criticize, because if noone had done this in our
> countries, we would not savor our current freedom. The best we can do is
> at least to protect them to the best of our abilities.

 I think perhaps we're getting a little melodramatic here. I was under the
impression that we're here to write an encyclopedia, not fight oppression.
If the former happens to lead to the latter, that's a great bonus. My point
was that it's up to the user to protect himself. If a slip of an IP address
will likely lead to harsh punishment, the risk of editing is almost
certainly too high. I'm NOT saying that we should be careless and expose IP
addresses, but to treat this as a matter of life and death is unnecessary
rhetoric.
 Carbonite