[WikiEN-l] Oversight log

Fri Jun 23 15:15:19 UTC 2006

On 23/06/06, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> How would it violate GFDL, and what would the "worrying" consequences be?

I said it was "potentially GFDL-violating". Surely you, as a member of
the ArbCom, know of the attribution requirements of the GFDL. Carnildo
pointed out an example of one such situation earlier in this thread.
And I'm a little concerned that you don't seem to think violation on
our part of the GFDL would be worrying in itself.

> Of what benefit would that information be, and to whom?  What would
> the subsequent action be, some editor saying "why did Jimbo remove
> that revision on June 23"?  He's already said why, Personal
> Information.  This suggestion would just turn the log into a fishing
> expedition for distrustful editors.

I see what you mean about the fishing trip. But I still feel a listing
of these actions would be beneficial purely for the statistics it
would show.

I think you are under the mistaken delusion that members of the ArbCom
are automatically trusted by the community. I know less than the half
the people given this oversight power, and of those, I trust even
fewer. These people (including yourself) have been given access to
what was effectively a developer-only action, and are asking the rest
of us to "just trust you" that you'll all make sure you're all doing
the right thing. That doesn't cut the mustard with me. I trust the
developers I used to get to do this manually far more than most of the
people now afforded this power. If User X is doing 95% of the
oversight revision deletions, I'd like to know about it.

This is different to the CheckUser logs because this has content
implications, not privacy implications.