On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:44:43 -0500, "Wily D"
<wilydoppelganger(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Realistically, one could construe the checkuser policy
as a sort of
contract between Wikipedia and the editors - so any use outside of the
policy (
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CheckUser_policy) could be
reasonably called abusive and a breach of contract. At least one
checkuser has admitted to abusing the position in the past, I'm not
sure why you'd assume that other incidents don't exist.
I'm more troubled by the casual assumption that abuse is routine. I
don't see any evidence to support that. Obviously where humans are
concerned there is potential for error and abuse, but the checkusers
we have seem to be decent and honest.
I don't see any credible evidence that the tool is being used
outside policy right now.
Policy says:
The tool is to be used to fight vandalism, to check for sockpuppet
abuse, and to limit disruption of the project. It must be used only
to prevent damage to any of Wikimedia projects.
The tool should not be used for political control; to apply pressure
on editors; or as a threat against another editor in a content
dispute. There must be a valid reason to check a user. Note that
alternative accounts are not forbidden, so long as they are not used
in violation of the policies (for example, to double-vote or to
increase the apparent support for any given position).
Notification to the account that is checked is permitted but is not
mandatory. Similarly, notification of the check to the community is
not mandatory, but may be done subject to the provisions of the
privacy policy.
Some wikis allow an editor's IPs to be checked upon his or her
request if, for example, there is a need to provide evidence of
innocence against a sockpuppet allegation; note, however, that
requesting a checkuser in these circumstances is sometimes part of
the attempt to disrupt.
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG