[WikiEN-l] Editing with open proxies

[Rich Holton]

jayjg wrote:
> On 6/16/07, Rich Holton <richholton at gmail.com> wrote:
>> James Farrar wrote:
>>> On 17/06/07, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> James, why didn't he/she just respond "there's nothing wrong with that,
>> is
>>>> there?" Occam's razor is often a helpful tool.
>>> Jay (I'll have to assume that's your first name),
>>>
>>> Probably because as soon as you fired the torpedo at her RFA, she went
>>> and looked it up and realised it was against policy. So she naturally
>>> did the instinctive thing when under attack, which is to shoot back.
>>>
>>> How long ago did you know of her open proxy use, and why did you not
>>> bring it up before the RFA?
>>>
>> This last question is important. I urge jayjg to answer it.
> 
> 
> Why is it important?

Because you are in a position of enhanced authority, you are therefore 
in a position of enhanced responsibility and accountability.

The underlying question here is, if someone with checkuser repeatedly 
sees the same user editing from open proxies, is there any 
responsibility for the checkuser to notify the user that they are in 
violation of policy? Or is it acceptable to simply block the proxy and 
allow the user to continue? And for how long? At what point should 
seeing a user repeatedly violating policy provoke a response from 
someone with checkuser status?

Regardless of the merits of the RFA in question, your use of Checkuser 
has been brought into question. Since you seem quite reluctant to answer 
the specific question, let's make it general:

If you see via the Checkuser facility that someone is repeatedly 
violating NOP, do you *ever* do anything more than block the proxy? If 
so, what? and when?

-Rich