On 6/17/07, Rich Holton <richholton(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
jayjg wrote:
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?
I have no idea what the policy or practice is; it has certainly never
been written up.
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?
It depends entirely upon the situation. If they're obvious vandals or
the like, then I block them as well as blocking the proxy.
So, you use your judgment to make these decisions. That's valid and
expected. CU status is given to those we assume to have good judgment
on these sort of issues.
But it is exactly your judgment that is in question here: Your judgment
that led you to publicly reveal the use of TOR by a user in good
standing (evidently, since you say that you never took any steps with CW
beyond blocking the OP) at the time it would have the worst possible
effect on that user in good standing.
Against policy? Probably not. Good judgment on your part. Absolutely not.
I honestly think that you should consider resigning your CU status.
Accept responsibility for your own actions. At the very minimum, you
should admit an error in judgment.
-Rich