Angela wrote:
Another point is, right now, all stewards have check user access. But no steward was approved by a developer or by Tim himself (who is at the origine of the steward status creation), nor by Jimbo. So, do you suggest that stewards are asked not to use this tool ? Or should they be allowed only after approval by Jimbo or Tim ? Or should stewards be only nominated by Jimbo or Tim in the future ?
It isn't true that all stewards have CheckUser access. Stewards have the ability, though not the right, to assign themselves this access. It's unfortunate that some have violated their privileges by assigning themselves CheckUser access without approval of the communities they're using it on. I thought stewards could be trusted not to do that, but seemingly not.
Angela A steward with no checkuser access
Hoi, I can remember some discussion where it was said that a steward without the knowledge to use this tool should not use it. This was at a time where a lot of problems were made worse by the lack of someone able or willing to do a checkuser on the Dutch wikipedia. The consensus at that time was that stewards should be considered responsible enough to decide for themselves if they are able to use a tool like this.
It was also discussed that a checkuser user should have the right to test for sockpuppetry when it is considered a possibility. It can be done discreetly. This allows a steward to quietly dispel the notion that two users are the same. This is less acrimonious than the fact that something is checked. The fact that someone is checked is often felt as an insult on its own. By allowing for discretion a lot of feathers will not be ruffled. Obviously, any project can do it in his/her way but given that the checkuser tool needs to be timely applied, I would consider using the tool by committee a self defeating proposition.
Thanks, GerardM