[WikiEN-l] SlimVirgin and CheckUser leaks

[Mackan79]

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 12:31 PM, Thatcher131 Wikipedia <
thatcher131 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 11:16 AM,  < nawrich at gmail.com > wrote:
> >
> > So here is a breakdown of Sarah's complaint, let me know if I've got this
> > right:
> >
> > * A checkuser checked two accounts, and she disagrees with the basis for
> > that check
> > * The fact that her account was also checked is, to her, not relevant
> > * One account was an established editor editing under a different name
> > * The established editor then stopped editing for fear of the accounts
> being
> > connected
> > * The only disclosure of information was to the checkusers wife (hard to
> > criticise, I think)
> > * A review by other checkusers and an Ombudsman found no problem with the
> > checks
>
> The incident was discussed on checkuser-L when SlimVirgin made a
> complaint to Anthere that was naturally one-sided.  The names of the
> accounts were never spoken openly, although a few people probably
> guessed.  And Jayjg (mostly) acted as a proxy for Slim, Crum and
> Wikitumnus, who are not subscribed to the list. (I don't mean "proxy"
> in a bad way, I mean he represented their views on a mailing list that
> they can not subscribe to.)  Therefore the debate mainly consisted of
> Jayjg arguing there was no good reason for the check and Lar saying
> there was.  SlimVirgin's view that Mackan79 made a politically
> motivated request for the purposes of digging up dirt, and Mackan79's
> list of suspicious diffs, were simply never discussed, because the
> actual user names were never used but were referred to by code names.
>
> So I don't think one can come to the conclusion that "the checkusers"
> found no problem, we lacked key information to conduct a proper
> review.  At the time I believe I suggested asking a subcommittee of
> checkusers from other wikis to be given access to all the information
> for a non-biased review, but it never happened.  And to the best of my
> knowledge, no formal complaint has ever been made to the ombudsman
> commission.
>
> Thatcher
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

One of the questions here seems to be whether any discussion of alternate
account usage by an "identifiable" account implicates the privacy policy.
If I understand correctly, CUs can discuss potential alternate accounts
under the CU policy without generally falling under the privacy policy.   If
one of the suggestions here is that this changes for any editor who can be
identified, I think that's incorrect.  Under the Privacy Policy, I believe
this is because all it protects is specifically the data collected "in" the
data logs.  Similarly, the CU policy under "Privacy Policy" exempts
situations where users "have already revealed this information themselves on
the project."

I can only speculate whether this applies; on the other hand it might show
problem with trying to resolve this kind of issue publicly where we can't
know the full information and where Lar can't respond.