On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:44:43 -0500, "Wily D" wilydoppelganger@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)