[WikiEN-l] To have or to have not power -- "giggle," "giggle"

[K P]

On 6/18/07, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/18/07, K P <kpbotany at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > If open proxies are bad, editors should be stopped when it is first
> > discovered they are using them--registered editors.  And, they should
> > not be selectively revealed in political circumstances.
>
> "In political circumstances" is a meaningless phrase attempting to
> somehow tie this incident to both Wikipedia policy, and to various
> absurd conspiracy theories. *Every* circumstance on Wikipedia is
> "political" when you view it through the lens of conspiracy and cabal.

But I don't view it through the lens of conspiracy and cabal.  I think
most peopls are far too lazy and interested only in themselves to
effectively secure a cabal in the first place.

And, adminship is a more powerful position on Wikipedia, it requires
candidacy, community approval, questioning and voting:it's more
political than regular editing.  Regulara editing requires nothing
much at all.


> >
> > Also, if this is being revealed under these circumstance, when
> > Charlotte was never investigated for sock puppetry as a check user,
> > what other information about other users is subject to being revealed
> > when it is obtained by those with check user powers?
>
> Well, I've actually quite often seen CheckUsers mention the ISP an
> editor is using, which is something that I, of course, have not done
> here. Revealing *actual* information about editors is covered by the
> CheckUser policy.
>
Oh, and is this not allowed to be given, ISPs?  And did you confront
the person revealing the ISP in those circumstances?  IS this supposed
to make me feel safer?  It seems like a morras of irresponsibility.

KP