Comment on the candidate below or by email to the Committee • Community consultation period is now closed.
DeltaQuad ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
Hello everyone, I am DeltaQuad, and I've been an administrator for several months now, and have been an SPI clerk for about a year and a half now. I've seen many forms of anything from vandals to meatpuppets to right out sockpuppets themselves and how they disrupt the community. This trust to investigate potential sockpuppets in a neutral view is similar, but multiplies significantly when we talk about the Audit Subcommittee. The trust of Functionaries group is only something that is earned from a community and this subcommittee is what helps maintain that trust. With leaving close to no trace behind, these tools need to be used carefully and why it has guidelines for usage. The community in general should already trust the Functionaries team, but it does not remove the necessity that some sort of oversight or auditing to occur since a user's privacy is at stake when these tools are used. I'm not saying I don't trust the functionaries team, I do trust them, but trust has to be maintained, as anyone would know with friendship. If you are willing to have me, I would like to assist in maintaining this trust between the community and the Functionaries team. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ)
Please describe any relevant on-Wiki experience you have for this role.
Please outline, without breaching your personal privacy, what off-Wiki experience or technical expertise you have for this role.
Do you hold advanced permissions (checkuser, oversight, bureaucrat, steward) on this or other WMF projects? If so, please list them. Also, do you have OTRS permissions? If so, to which queues?
1. Do you think AUSC members should actively use the CheckUser or Oversight tool? Amalthea 08:47, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
2. Why do you think it is important to keep AUSC investigations private? Whenaxis talk · contribs 22:57, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Part of the rationale for having non-Arb members on this committee, at least as I see it, is to give more voice to the 'common editor'. People who have had advanced permissions for long periods of time might view the use of those permissions differently from those that didn't have access to those rights before joining the committee. With this in mind, I note that several candidates have advanced permissions, including not only CU and OS but also permissions are more powerful and more exclusive that CU and OS.
3. Firstly, do you consider my 'common editor' rationale to be accurate? If not, what is the reason that the committee contains non-Arbs?
4. Secondly, do you believe that having advanced and ultra-advanced permissions for significant periods of time would alter how a user (not any specific user) would approach the position of AUSC member?
5. Finally, do you believe that this 'overqualified' concern might reasonably apply to you, and if so, how would you go about handling such a concern and mitigating its impact? Sven Manguard Wha? 16:07, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Comment on the candidate below or by email to the Committee • Community consultation period is now closed.
DeltaQuad ( talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
Hello everyone, I am DeltaQuad, and I've been an administrator for several months now, and have been an SPI clerk for about a year and a half now. I've seen many forms of anything from vandals to meatpuppets to right out sockpuppets themselves and how they disrupt the community. This trust to investigate potential sockpuppets in a neutral view is similar, but multiplies significantly when we talk about the Audit Subcommittee. The trust of Functionaries group is only something that is earned from a community and this subcommittee is what helps maintain that trust. With leaving close to no trace behind, these tools need to be used carefully and why it has guidelines for usage. The community in general should already trust the Functionaries team, but it does not remove the necessity that some sort of oversight or auditing to occur since a user's privacy is at stake when these tools are used. I'm not saying I don't trust the functionaries team, I do trust them, but trust has to be maintained, as anyone would know with friendship. If you are willing to have me, I would like to assist in maintaining this trust between the community and the Functionaries team. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ)
Please describe any relevant on-Wiki experience you have for this role.
Please outline, without breaching your personal privacy, what off-Wiki experience or technical expertise you have for this role.
Do you hold advanced permissions (checkuser, oversight, bureaucrat, steward) on this or other WMF projects? If so, please list them. Also, do you have OTRS permissions? If so, to which queues?
1. Do you think AUSC members should actively use the CheckUser or Oversight tool? Amalthea 08:47, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
2. Why do you think it is important to keep AUSC investigations private? Whenaxis talk · contribs 22:57, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Part of the rationale for having non-Arb members on this committee, at least as I see it, is to give more voice to the 'common editor'. People who have had advanced permissions for long periods of time might view the use of those permissions differently from those that didn't have access to those rights before joining the committee. With this in mind, I note that several candidates have advanced permissions, including not only CU and OS but also permissions are more powerful and more exclusive that CU and OS.
3. Firstly, do you consider my 'common editor' rationale to be accurate? If not, what is the reason that the committee contains non-Arbs?
4. Secondly, do you believe that having advanced and ultra-advanced permissions for significant periods of time would alter how a user (not any specific user) would approach the position of AUSC member?
5. Finally, do you believe that this 'overqualified' concern might reasonably apply to you, and if so, how would you go about handling such a concern and mitigating its impact? Sven Manguard Wha? 16:07, 10 February 2012 (UTC)