On 08/10/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote:
The new rules at CheckUser demand a code letter. The
code letters
available *do not* include checking the identity of apparent socks
being used to astroturf a POV. I have no problem with requiring
credible evidence before asking for CheckUser but it does rather
stymie the process of confirming sockpuppetry outside of closed votes.
Wasn't discussed on checkuser-l, but I can fully understand Uninvited
going ahead and setting it up that way. If you think as "requests for
checkuser" as "requests for magic wiki pixie dust truth serum" you
will get a better idea. (And the solution isn't more checkers.)
I've noted on [[WT:RFCU]] that it may or may not need its own code
letter, as WP:ANI is a less than satisfactory place to send requests
of that sort. Also cc'ing this to checkuser-l.
- d.