[Foundation-l] Note regarding status of privacy policy (suggestion)

Sun Aug 10 14:32:52 UTC 2008

private musings wrote:
> yup... I'm a bad little thing!
>
> ....this is an attempt at levity - David's comments could do with a bit of
> context - but yeah, people should be aware of my situation. I'm more than
> happy to chat about it if anyone wants to contact me - it's certainly what
> led me to look further into the role of checkuser, and was the seed which
> led to my belief that the oversight of checkuser processes currently doesn't
> do enough to prevent wik-political misuse of the tool.
>
> actually.. this gives me the welcome opportunity to reiterate where I see
> the centre of this discussion;
>
> Does it really matter if people are checkusered regularly, with a liberally
> low bar, and the information garnered from such checks is shared between
> friends and colleagues equally liberally?
>
> I very much feel like I'm finding my feet at this list, so will lurk a bit
> more now lest I run the risk of being placed on moderation for disruption...
> this list is pretty heated, isn't it!
>
> Peter,
> PM.
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>   
While I don't presume to speak for the list moderators (not being one 
and all), I can't imagine you're anywhere close to moderation here at 
this time. Moderation tends to be used here for off-topic conversations 
that won't die, conversations that are "over" but someone isn't letting 
them die, excessive flaming, or in rare cases (usually connected to the 
second), to stifle a conversation that is not welcome.

This thread as it exists now is none of those (though given a few more 
days it probably will be).

-Dan