Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight/2011 CUOS appointments/CU/Courcelles: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 22:22, 27 September 2011

Revision as of 17:18, 28 September 2011

Line 43:

In April 2011, you were appointed to ArbCom's [[WP:AUSC|Audit Subcommittee]]. What experiences do you bring from there that would be an asset for you as a full CheckUser? Note that I am not looking for specifics, but more general experiences as a result of your time on the subcommittee. –[[User talk:MuZemike|MuZemike]] 21:31, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

: '''A:''' Well, your third question directly hits against something the AUSC reported on earlier in the year, whether tying an IP to an account was permissible under policy. AUSC work is very much a crash course in everything that functionaries deal with in using these tools, as not only does an AUSC member have to be fully capable of using them (I continue to insist that opining on the validity of a tool's use you don't know how to use is unwise), AUSC members have to be able to determine (though discussion, to be fair) whether certain usages of the tools was legitimate. AUSC members have to learn, quickly, as much as they can about the tools to be any use on that subcommittee, and to internalise the policies related to their use, and what constitutes misuse. [[User:Courcelles|Courcelles]] 02:44, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Checkuers are often relied on to determine whether someone is using anonymising proxies to perform their sockpuppetry. Please describe your general experience in this area. Please also describe, preferably with an example, how you (would have) suspected, identified, confirmed, and blocked a socking open proxy on Wikipedia. -- [[user:zzuuzz|zzuuzz]] ^{[[user_talk:zzuuzz|(talk)]]} 17:18, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

=====Comments=====