[Foundation-l] checkuser

[Florence Devouard]

oh, sorry; of course. My mistake.

Ant

Casey Brown wrote:
> Perhaps it may be best to point discussions of the privacy policy itself to
> the *meta* talk page, considering that not all users have accounts on the
> Foundation wiki and that wiki itself isn't the ideal location for
> discussions.
> 
> So that would be <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Privacy_policy>.
> 
> Casey Brown
> Cbrown1023
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org
> [mailto:foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Florence
> Devouard
> Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2007 6:32 PM
> To: foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: [Foundation-l] checkuser
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> I got several requests about this, so this mail is mostly to get the 
> ball rolling. Nothing urgent !
> 
> Checkuser ombudsmen have been appointed now a year ago by the board.
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Ombudsperson_checkuser
> 
> I guess it is time for a renewal and little feedback on this, and more 
> generally, on checkusers.
> 
> So, please reflect on the following points if appropriate
> 
> 1. is there any change to the checkuser policy that you might wish to 
> suggest ? If so, please comment here: 
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Checkuser (talk page)
> 
> 2. are they currently checkusers who still do not comply with the data 
> access policy ? Perhaps Cary can give a private feedback on this.
> 
> 3. are they inactive checkusers ? If so, according to policy, they 
> should be removed. Can someone make a summary of activity, in the same 
> way that stewards activity perhaps ?
> 
> 4. is there any change to the privacy policy that you might wish to 
> suggest ? If so, http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Privacy_policy 
> (talk page)
> 
> 5. is there any change to suggest about the ombudsmen committee role ? 
> Clarifications ? If so, please here: 
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_committee (talk page).
> 
> 6. last year, ombudsmen committee was appointed by the board. Maybe this 
> year, we can do it differently, and have the community approve/vote 
> people and Foundation "sanctify" the community choice ? If so, how would 
> you suggest doing that ? Similar that steward election ? Or is there 
> another preferred solution ?
> 
> Please take the time to give a feedback on this within the next 2-3 
> weeks, so that we can move on end of august on the topic.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Ant
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l