Anthere wrote:
I absolutely understand that David. I just want to point out that the fact sysadmins in the real world are extremely cautious with data does not necessarily mean the editors who will be given access to checkuser will be cautious. As for our *own* sysadmins (well, in our case, basically, our developer team with shell access), they could do destructive things, but they pretty much don't :-) And we trust them :-)
Yes, that's what I mean :-) Basically I have access because I have some idea what the IP numbers mean, and Tim thinks I can be trusted not to reveal data unduly (and I think I can too). As what we're talking about is really a site maintenance/administration function (which is OK within the privacy policy), we need people we can trust that much.
That's what I mean by: We need to find people who we can trust with confidential information, then trust them all the way.
There are lots of editors who could *almost* certainly be trusted with confidential data to that degree, but I don't want to be making the decision that they can be trusted all the way :-)
- d.