Forum:Extension CheckUser

Forums: Index > Ministry of Love > Extension CheckUser

Note: This topic has been unedited for 1823 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over.

We currently have no way to determine if two users are coming in from the same IP address. We're probably going to want that, maybe in the near future. I'd like to propose that we install the CheckUser extension, and grant access to it to all bureaucrats. (If we don't trust them to know who's who on the site we probably shouldn't trust them to be Crats, either.)
That's option 1. There are other options as well; here's the list, as I see it.

1. As stated above: Install CheckUser, and then grant access to all crats.
2. Install CheckUser, but don't grant access to all crats. Establish some other group of users (somehow, with some criteria) who shall get access to CheckUser.
3. Decide to use "backdoor" methods to extract the IP addresses directly from the server. The set of people who could do this would be limited to those with server access.

IMHO option (3) smells and option (2) is likely to be a big pain to work out, with lots of dramatic discussion. Option (1), on the other hand, seems simple and effective. -- Snarglefoop (talk) 04:02, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

This doesn't strike me as vital. If a CheckUser reveals that two users have different IPs, that is inconclusive. If it reveals they have the same IP, that is saying something; but a vandal who knows we use it can easily contrive to have different IPs.

The "backdoor" methods amplify the problem of Uncyclopedia (and the Fork) having arbitrary Uncyclopedians be the site owner. Miraheze has a procedure under which a Steward authorizes himself for CheckUser only on request and for only as long as required. This doesn't prevent abuse, but leaves a clear audit trail.

The issue arises as an Uncyclopedian quits and leaves a pointer to an account on the Fork that we think is someone else. Um, so what? It is part-and-parcel of enforcing order at a costume party. Spıke 🎙️04:13 24-May-19

Option 1 is the best choice to me. But I'll be bugging crats for IPs as I have been looking at vandals as they come to visit.

Then again, if a couple of crats assume vetting and blocking duties, I won't have to. I'd still block a vandal, but the ultimate ban length would be determined by a crat. I think it's important to recognize repeat offenders and have found when an "Angel" dropped in from Wikia and did a vandal revert, the offender would not be banned here (they couldn't do that here) or generally (most are not Wikia people). Even when the banhammer was dropped by Starman W or CavaX, I wouldn't know the details. So since I didn't see the vandal M.O., it was impossible to tell if a vandal returned or not, especially if the visit was out of the range of the last 100 changes when I got to the page. -- (talk) 03:00, 26 May 2019 (UTC)