On 6/15/07, Slim Virgin slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/15/07, Steve Summit scs@eskimo.com wrote:
Jayjg wrote:
On 6/15/07, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
This policy would not allow a checkuser on CharlotteWebb
As explained on the RFA, CharlotteWebb came to my attention while I was investigating other abuses and abusers. His/her name kept showing up on the list of editors every time a TOR proxy was involved...
Okay, but part of the trust that's involved in a tool like checkuser is *not* paying attention to (let alone revealing) stuff you accidentally notice while investigating something else.
There's no reason something that's noticed accidentally should be any different from something that's looked for specifically.
I disagree with this. People have expectations of privacy in certain things; if the person hasn't been found to be abusing Wikipedia, then CU and other vandal-fighting info shouldn't be in the public domain.
Modify that by "Perhaps all Tor accounts are vulnerable to hijack in a way which means that we shouldn't let any admin use Tor at all", but applying that selectively to CharoletteWebb and not everyone else is unfair.