Anthere wrote:
I absolutely understand that David. I just want to
point out that the
fact sysadmins in the real world are extremely cautious with data does
not necessarily mean the editors who will be given access to checkuser
will be cautious.
As for our *own* sysadmins (well, in our case, basically, our developer
team with shell access), they could do destructive things, but they
pretty much don't :-) And we trust them :-)
Yes, that's what I mean :-) Basically I have access because I have
some idea what the IP numbers mean, and Tim thinks I can be trusted
not to reveal data unduly (and I think I can too). As what we're
talking about is really a site maintenance/administration function
(which is OK within the privacy policy), we need people we can trust
that much.
That's what I mean by: We need to find people who we can trust with
confidential information, then trust them all the way.
There are lots of editors who could *almost* certainly be trusted with
confidential data to that degree, but I don't want to be making the
decision that they can be trusted all the way :-)
- d.