On 6/15/07, jayjg jayjg99@gmail.com wrote:
If there's any "moral panic" here, it's in your post. I simply asked why the editor was using TOR proxies, which, as we all know, is a *violation of policy*. That's it. When he/she insisted on knowing why I "invaded her privacy", I explained how I had initially come across the information. I didn't stop him/her from gaining adminship, nor did I associate him/her with malicious sockpuppets, nor any other such nonsense. From what I can tell, many of the "oppose" votes were in reaction to over-the-top statements like yours. And if there's an "ethics-meter" issue, it is about how people like Joe and you are now framing this. _______________________________________________
Jayjg, if I may say something here...I'm pretty uninvolved here, methinks, but I think I can see where people are coming from. I was just looking over the Checkuser policy at meta, and it's a fairly brief policy (my favorite kind). If we set the strict question of privacy aside (because if you look at it, no privacy is really being violated), I think the bit most people are hinging around is this phrase: The tool should not be used for political control; to apply pressure on editors; or as a threat against another editor in a content dispute.
Now, strictly speaking this isn't, of course, a content dispute. The spirt, if you're willing to allow a bit of leeway, is that Checkuser shouldn't be used to gain an unfair advantage against someone. I think some people feel your question was a loaded one, intended to alter the course of Charlotte's RFA. Personally, I see no evidence for this, and on the face of things I accept that you were just asking a question. But regardless of your intent, it may have still been a loaded weapon.
My question on the ethics of Checkuser, for anyone here, is this: if a Checkuser discovers a policy violation (whether it's a direct investigation, or indirect one), what choice should they have in enforcement? Jayjg hasn't mentioned how long he's know Charlotte edits through TOR proxies (that I'm aware of), or if he's taken any other steps about it. Did he block those TOR IPs? Did he ever contact Charlotte about this before?
I can see why it may seem unfair to bring it up during an RFA...I might even agree about with that. I'm not sure I'd agree it's an ethical violation, though. As a Checkuser, and (I assume), an admin I think Jayjg should use his judgement in enforcing policy to protect the project. Strict enforcement of the NOP doesn't seem to be de riguir right now. I would question if the risk of TOR proxies is more serious for a potential admin versus a regular editor, but that's a different sort of discussion for elsewhere...perhaps not on her RFA, but definitely the main RFA talk page perhaps.
So, anyway, I think the ethical question is this: Is Jayjg using his knowledge from Checkuser in this RFA to move discussion for his own benefit? That's a serious charge, in my eyes, and would need some solid evidence. Because I think it's more likely, and in good faith, to think he's simply using his knowledge to better the project. My apologies if I've rambled too far...
InkSplotch