She's arguing for a separation of powers.
QUOTE
"I can not help thinking that the rather ugly atmosphere that
developped on enwiki is largely due to the very large and uncontrolled
use of the checkuser tool by a minority.
When one gives specific tools to a person, that's creates a power lever
which may be used to grab bits of power. Which is more or less what is
happening, much to the dismay of those who do not have that power."[1]
developped on enwiki is largely due to the very large and uncontrolled
use of the checkuser tool by a minority.
When one gives specific tools to a person, that's creates a power lever
which may be used to grab bits of power. Which is more or less what is
happening, much to the dismay of those who do not have that power."[1]
QUOTE
... in real life, the law is decided by some, the
judgement using legal information and past history is done by others,
and last the application of the judgement is applied by a third group.
For example, parliament, judges and cops.
Right now, it seems the community left in part the parliament in the
hands of the arbcom. The investigators are the checkusers. Judges are
arbcom. Arbcom are also checkusers, so investigation and judgement are
done by the same. Cops are the admins (for ban) or oversight (for clean
up). Arbcom is frequently playing the admin and oversight role.
In short, the principles of separation are very weakly implemented.
There ought to be a reason why most democracies decided to separate
those, don't you think ?[2]
judgement using legal information and past history is done by others,
and last the application of the judgement is applied by a third group.
For example, parliament, judges and cops.
Right now, it seems the community left in part the parliament in the
hands of the arbcom. The investigators are the checkusers. Judges are
arbcom. Arbcom are also checkusers, so investigation and judgement are
done by the same. Cops are the admins (for ban) or oversight (for clean
up). Arbcom is frequently playing the admin and oversight role.
In short, the principles of separation are very weakly implemented.
There ought to be a reason why most democracies decided to separate
those, don't you think ?[2]
She's decidedly butting heads with Jimbo's idea of using checkuser early, often and in secret.
QUOTE
In English Wikipedida, ArbCom is
a good place to go for this sort of thing.
However, having reviewed checkuser policy, I see absolutely nothing even
close to a policy violation here.
"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."
I strongly support this element of the policy.
a good place to go for this sort of thing.
However, having reviewed checkuser policy, I see absolutely nothing even
close to a policy violation here.
"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."
I strongly support this element of the policy.
