[WikiEN-l] Oversight log

[Mark Ryan]

On 23/06/06, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm looking for someone who will state what they believe the
> likelihood of this happening, and what the practical consequences
> might be.

I guess deletion/selective undeletion in itself has GFDL consequences.
But then again, there is a log given for deletions by admins.

> I'm not under any "mistaken delusions". :-)   Nevertheless, the
> community has shown significant support for many of the members,
> particularly in the recent elections.  Of course, every member elected
> also got oppose votes, so distrust (at least by the opposers) is
> inevitable.
>
> How were the developers elected, and what made you trust them?

The developers were not elected (and neither, technically, was the
ArbCom either). Brion is an employee of Wikimedia, and therefore is
subject to actual legal duties relating to the carrying out of his
functions. Tim Starling I have known for over 3 years and has always
displayed the utmost integrity, particularly when dealing with
situations involving the removal of sensitive information from the
'pedia.

But that is beside the point. It still hasn't been explained why the
Arbitrators were selected as the main repositories of these powers.
Does the removal of revisions crop up frequently in arbitrations
undertaken by the ArbCom? Or has the ArbCom somehow morphed into
something more than an Arbitration Committee, to be some sort of
Content Management Committee?

The Concise Oxford English Dictionary defines 'arbitrator' as "an
independent person or body officially appointed to settle a dispute".

Also, [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee]] says nothing about the
ArbCom having any role beyond resolving disputes.

> Are content implications more serious than privacy implications?

No. I'm saying the opposite. The reason the CheckUser logs are private
is because of the significant privacy implications involved in
accessing our server data. Only those Officially appointed by the
Wikimedia Foundation should be able to access such data/logs.

On the other hand, the question of revision content is not immediately
related to the questions of privacy laws.