Bryan Derksen wrote:
Armed Blowfish wrote:
No. There are plenty of matters on which I
disagree with Jayjg.
But I do believe he means well, and oversight is basically a Good
Thing (TM), quite usefull for protecting privacy. Letting me
know exactly what sort of information is being protected
would defeat the point of protecting it.
Knowing what _sort_ of information is being oversighted is a far cry
from knowing the information itself, I don't see how it defeats the
point. If I were to ask why something was oversighted there's a big
difference between getting the answer "because it contained personal
identifying material" and "it contained the home address of
User:Encyclofreak, who lives at 121 Big Tree Road in Seattle, NV".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
That was brought up on-wiki as well, and I would tend to agree. Just
like a deleted attack article just contains a deletion summary,
something to the effect of "G10: Attack page", but not the offending
text itself. There's a big difference between "Oversighter removed 2
revisions: Contained personal information" and "Someuser's phone number
is 123-456-7890! Call him and tell him he sucks!"