QUOTE(No one of consequence @ Mon 1st August 2011, 5:25pm)
QUOTE(chrisoff @ Mon 1st August 2011, 8:37pm)
No one asked Essajay to "prove" his credentials. Here arbcom seems to be doing the same thing. "He says he is a psychiatrist, so he must be one!" Disregarding the low level of his "psychiatric opinions", is he a bona fide psychiatrist? Or is he anonther Essajay?
Arbcom and Jimmy got badly burned by the Essjay scandal. As a result, they began insisting that anyone who was elected to Arbcom, plus anyone else who was requesting access to Oversight or Checkuser, identify themselves to the Foundation. Ostensibly, this is to make sure that anyone with access to information protected by the privacy policy is over the legal age of responsibility wherever they live. In reality, this is a secondary reason at best, and the primary reason is to make sure people are who they say they are.
A quick google search turns up a psychiatrist in NSW whose hobby is mushrooms by the name "Cas Liber." If you want to be conspiratorial, all the user identification proves is that the user "Casliber" had temporary access to Cas Liber's drivers license or passport, to fax a copy to WMF. But I think that in the wake of the Essjay business you can be fairly certain that anyone with Checkuser or Oversight is who they claim to be (if they claim to be anyone at all).
If on the other hand you are not convinced, then you might as well just stop playing the identity game and assume that everyone on Wikipedia is Essjay, because there is unlikely to be any practical verification procedure that will satisfy you.
So he is the official psychiatrist for arbcom? (But the quality of his "consultations" is so low, a joke really.) Plus, does Arbcom insist on seeing his license? Licenses are normally hanging on the office wall. Shouldn't we all be allowed to see his?
Does he have liability insurance covering his "consultations" on wikipedia? (Doubtful, as what company would cover such foolishness.)
Or just the fact that some one called Cas Liber who lives in NSW and calls himself an psychiatrist is enough? And is he competent in making diagnoses over the internet.? (Almost never would a psychiatrist claim such expertise, as it would be a speciality for which one would need a certification.)
And isn't it frightening that arbcom is engaging in psychiatric analysis?