[Foundation-l] Oversight rights

[Sean Whitton (Xyrael)]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Listusers/checkuser reveals five
people who have b'crat and checkuser :)

Just a side note for those who are interested.

On 20/12/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 20/12/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The effect of an inappropriate release of checkuser data is an
> > irreparable loss of privacy. I wouldn't go so far as saying that a
> > carelessly performed checkuser could be life threatening, since if
> > your life is on the line over any websites ability to protect your
> > privacy thats your mistake.. but it is clear that often the result of
> > a mistake made with checkuser data can not simply be undone.
> > As such I don't think we should get in the practice of considering
> > oversight a more sensitive privilege than checkuser.
>
>
> The way we do it on en:wp is that the arbitration committee says who
> gets either, and those with checkuser and oversight tend to be
> arbitrators and ex-arbitrators.
>
> That is: what Greg points out is true, but in practice if someone's
> considered sufficiently trustworthy then they're likely to have either
> job land on them.
>
> (We tend not to have a lot of crossover between the
> AC/checkuser/oversighter pool and the bureaucrat pool; I think only
> Raul654 is both on en:wp.)
>
>
> - d.
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


-- 
—Sean Whitton	(Xyrael)	[sean at silentflame dot com]
	Knowledge is power, but only wisdom is liberty.