On 3/30/07, Ron Ritzman <ritzman(a)gmail.com> wrote:
What I want to know is why they don't just open up checkuser to more
admins? Anybody who is trusted with tools that allow him to make pages
go away (including the main page) and keep anybody they want from
editing would not be trusted with checkuser. Or is it a matter of the
technical knowledge needed to properly interpret checkuser results?
CheckUser involves access to sensitive, confidential information, and
involves a drastically higher level of trust than is required of an
admin. Page protection and deletion are reversible actions, the
release of private information is not.
Note that appointment by the ArbCom is the proper method for granting
CheckUser access on a project with an ArbCom:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CheckUser_policy
--
Stephen Bain
stephen.bain(a)gmail.com