[WikiEN-l] SlimVirgin and CheckUser leaks

[Marc Riddell]

> David Katz wrote:
>> Do users have the right to be told if a checkuser has been run by them and
>> by whom? SlimVirgin seems to. Several years ago the fact that Kelly Martin
>> ran a check on her was leaked and maximum drama ensued. This year, SV was
>> informed that Lar ran a check on a friend of hers and again, drama.
>> 
>> Either all users should have the right to know if checks have been run on
>> them or none should. SV should not have special access to information just
>> because she has a friend who is a CheckUser and is willing to give her
>> information from the CheckUser log.

on 7/22/08 7:27 AM, Tim Starling at tstarling at wikimedia.org wrote:

> I've said whenever the topic has come up, since I introduced CheckUser,
> that the reason the log is private is to avoid the appearance of
> incrimination when innocent users are cross-tested against abusive users,
> to disprove an allegation of sockpuppetry. Having CheckUser run against
> you does not imply any kind of wrongdoing.
> 
> If anyone wants such information released about them, they can contact me,
> and I will give it to them. But I won't give out any information about the
> other users who are cross-checked in the same investigation.

Fresh air at last!
> 
> If SlimVirgin wants to imply that CheckUser is indeed a form of
> allegation, and act offended, then so be it. That's the price we pay for
> openness. You always have the option of ignoring her.
> 
Sounds like the best advice yet.

Marc