[Foundation-l] Stewards are ignoring requests for CheckUser information?

[Anthere]

Robert Scott Horning wrote:
> Essjay wrote:
> 
> 
>>Perhaps this would be an appropriate time to say "Maybe we could use a 
>>couple more stewards?"
>>
>>Essjay
>> 
>>
> 
> Or perhaps the minimum requirement for the number of votes for users to 
> get checkuser status on smaller projects like en.wikibooks is 
> unreasonable?  We have had a couple of candidates for checkuser status 
> for almost two months now, and we simply can't get the number of votes 
> necessary because of the size of our active user base. 

The requirements are 25 votes roughly. Has en.wikibooks lesser than 25 
active editors ? I would have thought it had more editors...

If there are more than 25 active editors, they may not know about the 
checkuser job, they may not know they could nominate their own 
checkuser, they may not know the interest for your project ?

----> advertise the job !

  Yet we are the
> target of repeated vandalism, and even sockpuppet voting from die-hard 
> sock puppets.  If the concern is that checkuser privileges are going to 
> be abused, it is a smaller user base that can be abused.


> Should projects be allowed to set their own standards for people with 
> this status, or is it something that is imutable and only set by the 
> Foundation board?  So far, only Wikipedias are seemingly allowed to have 
> somebody with checkuser status at all.  And if stewards are overwhelmed 
> with this task of dealing with checkuser scans, perhaps the policy needs 
> to be reviewed.

Rahhhh, do not go again on that rant : wikipedia get it all and we have 
nothing :-)

A policy can always be reviewed. But I sweated enough for that policy so 
that I feel not very motivated to go through this pain one more time :-)

The reason for the 25 votes limit comes from two reasons
* A community with less than 25 users is unlikely to really need 
frequent checkusers, because it is a project with reduced activity. So, 
it can not be a heavy load for stewards.
* A community with less than 25 users has a rather serious risk to have 
a rather little known editor become a checkuser, rather than a trusted 
oldbie. If we start handing out status just as we do for sysop status on 
small projects, I think there will be abuse. I say this from my 
experience, as I had to unsysop several sysops on small projects (the 
guys did not know our basic rules, behaved like dictators with the 
handful of editors, put advertisements on the main page, controlled povs 
etc...).

I am perplex that the en.wikibooks does not have a big enough base of 
editors to vote on a check user...
I am quite lazy, so I will not go to the stats page to check. But can 
you roughly say how many active editors per month the project currently 
has ? How many very active editors per month ?

ant