UDWiki talk:Privacy policy: Difference between revisions
From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
(I've been meaning to write up a new Checkuser policy for a while now. It should not be handed out willy-nilly as it is at present; I think the amount of abuse it has gotten clearly demonstrates…) |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
:Interesting opinion. It's true, at times I think checkuser should be only assigned to those who understand the consequences fully but at the same time it really hasn't been a massive issue for a while now. Only a couple times does anyone in the team slip up. [[User:DanceDanceRevolution|anno]][[Every Villain Is Lemons|ying]] 08:43, 13 October 2011 (BST) | :Interesting opinion. It's true, at times I think checkuser should be only assigned to those who understand the consequences fully but at the same time it really hasn't been a massive issue for a while now. Only a couple times does anyone in the team slip up. [[User:DanceDanceRevolution|anno]][[Every Villain Is Lemons|ying]] 08:43, 13 October 2011 (BST) | ||
::Yeah, and then the two worst were insta-demotions where people gave other people access to their accounts. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 13:12, 13 October 2011 (BST) | ::Yeah, and then the two worst were insta-demotions where people gave other people access to their accounts. --<small>[[User:Karek#K|Karek]]<sup><font face="Monotype Corsiva">[[User:Karek/ProjDev#Buildings_Update_Danger_Maps|maps 2.0?!]]</font></sup></small> 13:12, 13 October 2011 (BST) | ||
:I've been meaning to write up a new Checkuser policy for a while now. It should '''not''' be handed out willy-nilly as it is at present; I think the amount of abuse it has gotten clearly demonstrates that. {{User:Revenant/Sig}} 13:34, 13 October 2011 (BST) | |||
Revision as of 12:34, 13 October 2011
Since it is official policy, this page could do with being in Category:Policy Documents. (I know it wasn't voted on, but that doesn't change it being policy.)--Toejam 17:47, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Considering adding section re: personal data? -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 10:01, 6 May 2011 (BST)
yikes! sysops should have to take a personality test...you can hardly trust any1 w/ a plethora of IPs →Son of Sin← 05:55, 13 October 2011 (BST)
- To be fair 90% of them wouldn't know what to do with an IP to cause problems if they tried and the other 10% are real tight asses about leaking of personal information. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 07:21, 13 October 2011 (BST)
- Interesting opinion. It's true, at times I think checkuser should be only assigned to those who understand the consequences fully but at the same time it really hasn't been a massive issue for a while now. Only a couple times does anyone in the team slip up. annoying 08:43, 13 October 2011 (BST)
- Yeah, and then the two worst were insta-demotions where people gave other people access to their accounts. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 13:12, 13 October 2011 (BST)
- I've been meaning to write up a new Checkuser policy for a while now. It should not be handed out willy-nilly as it is at present; I think the amount of abuse it has gotten clearly demonstrates that. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 13:34, 13 October 2011 (BST)
