On 13/08/07, Anthony <wikimail(a)inbox.org> wrote:
On 8/13/07, Casey Brown
<cbrown1023.ml(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > OK, but how is that even possible. If
neither the main account nor
> > the sockpuppet are breaking policy, then a CU wouldn't reveal a
> > correlation in the first place. (I guess it's possible if a
> > completely different user happened to have used the same IP address,
> > but otherwise?)
> The event you mentioned in paranthesis is
actually pretty common and is
> probably what would have created that problem.
OK, but barring that event (say the person had a
static IP), there's
pretty much a consensus that a checkuser who found out such
information and never revealed it had broken checkuser policy (but not
privacy policy), right?
I suspect it's the sort of thing that would make the other checkers
wonder what the hell they thought they were playing at. Do you have a
specific example in mind? In real life, carefully-worded theoreticals
are much harder to talk about than actual examples.
- d.