Methinks it's a quest to be ready in case it actually happens. To express it as an irritating buzzword, "proactive."
Also politics. :D
On 6/21/06, Robert Scott Horning robert_horning@netzero.net wrote:
Kelly Martin wrote:
On 6/21/06, Robert Scott Horning robert_horning@netzero.net wrote:
I've heard a lot of fear mongering and what I percieve to be unwarrente fears about abuses to checkuser actions. Can you give some clear examples of what have been percieved as abuses of those with checkuser privileges, at least types of problems that have happened as a matter or practice?
I know I am speaking from an apparent minority opinion on this mailing list, but I fail to see what real damage is happening from simply looking up the IP address of a user.
I have yet to see a bona fide case of CheckUser abuse. However, this does not mean that we should fail to be vigilant for abuses. Trust, yet verify.
Having a group of people who are positioned to advise the Board in making policy in this area is a good idea in any case.
Kelly
If the abuse hasn't happened, where is the move to create such a position in the first place? A quest for political power?
-- Robert Scott Horning
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l