Within reasonable limits, all checkusers are probably best considered mutually trustworthy. Each project has separate checkusers but all fall under the WMF's management, and checkuser is a WMF provided capability. The notion of a divide isn't useful. If a checkuser can't be trusted, they can't be trusted on any project. The aim of checkuser and its reason for being provided is solely to safeguard WMF projects. That sounds like what was being done here.
FT2.
-----Original Message----- From: wikien-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of NavouWiki Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 1:25 AM To: 'English Wikipedia' Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Checkuser for fun, for profit, for mild curiosity, for sharing, for whatever
Two separate projects. Separate, no?
Navou
-----Original Message----- From: wikien-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Anthony Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 7:18 PM To: English Wikipedia Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Checkuser for fun, for profit, for mild curiosity, for sharing, for whatever
On 8/13/07, Casey Brown cbrown1023.ml@gmail.com wrote:
He's a checkuser on Commons.
So does that mean he has direct access to checkuser information on en.wikipedia, or does it mean that it's acceptable to tell him information about checkuser results from en.wikipedia, or neither?
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l