Yet another attempt from a checkuser to make monitoring their actions and ensuring our privacy more difficult.
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Risker <[email protected]> wrote: > Each project has its own standards and thresholds for when checkusers may > be done, provided that they are within the limits of the privacy policy. > These standards vary widely. So, the correct place to discuss this is on > each project. > > Risker > > On 13 June 2012 21:02, Thomas Dalton <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Why shouldn't spambots and vandals be notified? Just have the software > > automatically email anyone that is CUed. Then the threshold is simply > > whether you have an email address attached to your account or not. > > > > This seems like a good idea. People have a right to know what is being > done > > with their data. > > On Jun 14, 2012 12:35 AM, "Risker" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On 13 June 2012 19:18, John <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > This is something that has been bugging me for a while. When a user > has > > > > been checkusered they should at least be notified of who preformed it > > and > > > > why it was preformed. I know this is not viable for every single CU > > > action > > > > as many are for anons. But for those users who have been around for a > > > > period, (say autoconfirmed) they should be notified when they are > CU'ed > > > and > > > > any user should be able to request the CU logs pertaining to > themselves > > > > (who CU'ed them, when, and why) at will. I have seen CU's refuse to > > > provide > > > > information to the accused. > > > > > > > > See the Rich Farmbrough ArbCom case where I suspect obvious fishing, > > > where > > > > the CU'ed user was requesting information and the CU claimed it would > > be > > > a > > > > violation of the privacy policy to release the time/reason/performer > of > > > the > > > > checkuser. > > > > > > > > This screams of obfuscation and the hiding of information. I know the > > > > ombudsman committee exists as a check and balance, however before > > > something > > > > can be passed to them evidence of inappropriate action is needed. > Ergo > > > > Catch-22 > > > > > > > > I know checkusers keep a private wiki > > > > https://checkuser.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page and I know according > to > > > our > > > > privacy policy we are supposed to purge our information regularly (on > > > wiki > > > > CU logs exist for 90 days) however who oversees the regular removal > of > > > > private information on the wiki? > > > > > > > > My proposal would be for all users who are at least auto confirmed to > > be > > > > notified and be able to request all CU logs regarding themselves at > any > > > > point, and any mentions of themselves on the CU wiki should be > > > retrievable. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps some full disclosure should be made here John. You are a > > checkuser > > > yourself, have access to the checkuser-L mailing list and the checkuser > > > wiki, helped to set up the Audit Subcommittee on the English Wikipedia > > > (which carries out reviews of checkuser/oversighter actions on > request); > > > you are also a member of the English Wikipedia functionaries mailing > list > > > because you are a former arbitrator, a checkuser and an oversighter on > > > enwp. (so have access there to express your concerns or suggest changes > > in > > > standards), It seems you are complaining about a specific case, and > > > instead of talking things out about this specific case, you've decided > to > > > propose an entirely different checkusering standard. I'll point out > in > > > passing that half of the spambots blocked in recent weeks by checkusers > > > were autoconfirmed on one or more projects, and even obvious vandals > can > > > hit the autoconfirmed threshold easily on most projects. > > > > > > Full disclosure on my part: I am also an Enwp checkuser and a member of > > the > > > Arbitration Committee. > > > > > > Risker > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
