[Wikimedia-l] CheckUser openness

[Nathan]

On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Dominic McDevitt-Parks
<mcdevitd at gmail.com>wrote:

> I think the idea that making the log of checks public will necessarily be
> a service to those subject to CheckUser is misguided. One of the best
> reasons for keeping the logs private is not security through obscurity but
> the prevention of unwarranted stigma and drama. Most checks (which aren't
> just scanning a vandal or persistent sockpuppeteer's IP for other accounts)
> are performed because there is some amount of uncertainty. Not all checks
> are positive, and a negative result doesn't necessarily mean the check was
> unwarranted. I think those who have been checked without a public request
> deserve not to have suspicion cast on them by public logs if the check did
> not produce evidence of guilt. At the same time, because even justified
> checks will often upset the subject, the CheckUser deserves to be able to
> act on valid suspicions without fear of retaliation. The community doesn't
> need the discord that a public log would generate. That's not to say that
> there should be no oversight, but that a public log is not the way to do it.
>
>
> Dominic
>

The threat of stigma can be ameliorated by not making the logs public,
which was never suggested. A simple system notification of "The data you
provide to the Wikimedia web servers has been checked by a checkuser on
this project, see [[wp:checkuser]] for more information" would be enough.

En Pine's reply to my queries seems calibrated for someone who is
unfamiliar with SPI and checkuser work. I'm not - in fact I worked as a
clerk with checkusers at SPI for a long time and am quite familiar with the
process and its limitations. I know what's disclosed, approximately how
frequently checks are run, the general proportion of checks that are public
vs. all checks, etc. I still am not clear on how disclosing the fact of a
check helps socks avoid detection, and I still believe that it's worthwhile
for a transparent organization like Wikimedia to alert users when their
private information (information that is, as Risker has mentioned,
potentially personally identifying) has been disclosed to another
volunteer.

Nathan