Brian McNeil wrote: never In addition to otherobjections, some checkusers are performed to identify possible sockmasters of accounts that have been used to harass individual volunteers. Since any visible response at all can result in additional harassment, absolute openness exposes victims to more harassment. The requirement that checkuser requests identify a specific target account also exposes other innocent editors to stigmatization, since the community may construe mischief behind an account that was suggested but later cleared. I sympathize with the request for maximum openness, and I'm certainly not in the best position to voice an objection, but I really don't agree that transparency can or should be absolute. I could support a policy that required onsite checkuser requests except under defined circumstances such as the scenario above. -Durova