How effective is checkuser? Options

[Nerd]

I just wish Wikipedia would bit the bullet and a) demand real, verified identities and b) showed IP addresses with every edit.

Simples.

Why? That way we can't have any fun.

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

If you want to run several accounts to show how clever you are, you will quickly fail - because what is cleverness without recognition?

This is a good truth ... what is the fun is playing a game of hide and seek if you are not caught?

OK ... so let's kiss and tell. Get more technical about the art. It is worth many people playing this until the Piss Pee-dia finally bites the bullet and gives up on the exploitable puerility of anonymous ID.

The idea is to make it harder for the checkusers, create grounds for more false positive (the chaos and waste of resources those cost), erode their self-confidence, erode "community confidence" in the systems and processes, waste time and ... above all ... expose the corrupt abuse of the system for what it is. You need to do it for ethical purposes.

For example, how cultists can easily manipulate checkusers and admins to protect their own cult's topic.

You are going to have to keep a small database for your 'users' to remember all of this ...

• develop individual inflections in writing styles, for each of them.
• assign editing areas and patterns for some.
• use the "Random page" link for others.

• Finding and creating private web proxies, behind private routers, so that you can move your edits around internationally would be good idea.

• If you really want to go "pro" ... hire a few people in developing nations to work for you part-time. e.g. China, India etc. It will cost far less and be more successful for you in the long run.

Imagine ... what does an hours or so a day, 5 days a week cost? I can tell you ... not a lot. Pocketmoney.

Bit is what you are aiming at really worth doing? Bear in mind that a long term strategy is best and it takes may be a year or so now to reach admin status. But that should be your primary game plan.

Without admin powers, you will always get screwed ... right or wrong.

This post has been edited by Cock-up-over-conspiracy: Sat 2nd January 2010, 5:13am

[No one of consequence]

e) keep copies of data for far longer than 3 months on home computers. I have seen Thatcher admit to this and he is amongst the more honest and principled of them. That would suggest to me that the less honest and principled of them are up to much worse.

The amount of space needed to store the uid/IP bindings and all other wiki-surveillance output for the entire history of Wikipedia would be microscopic compared to the rest of the database.

This is a strong hint that any storage limits that supposedly exist are for a purpose other than mere disk space.

The privacy charade?

Which in turn suggests that anyone off-lining the data may not be operating within the Rules and Regulations. But even if permitted, how could such "evidence" be the basis for any argument? Thatcher or anyone else can synthesize any amount of "evidence" and declare they downloaded it from the inner sanctum before it was -- conveniently -- erased.

The retention limit is indeed philosophical rather than technical. Private retention of data by CUs has never been addressed by the Foundation, but I believe it should be.

While it would be possible to produce "fake" CU data, the fact that all checks are logged means that some cross-checking is possible.

[White Knight]

Keep in mind that checkuser is frequently used to provide a fig leaf of credibility for bans that are done on the basis of suppressing an incorrect POV. It doesn't have to identify your IP number as identical to that of another user (although that would be a slam dunk,) it merely has to make a plausible connection, geographic or otherwise.

Funny story- that actually backfired on Scarian one time. He tried to block me indefinitely because apparently I said something which offended him. The justification he provided was that I was a sockpuppeteer, so when the Checkuser result came back negative other admins called his judgment into question and he quickly unblocked me. Of course this was only after I raised a stink about it, otherwise I would still be blocked regardless of the Checkuser result.

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

The retention limit is indeed philosophical rather than technical. Private retention of data by CUs has never been addressed by the Foundation, but I believe it should be.

While it would be possible to produce "fake" CU data, the fact that all checks are logged means that some cross-checking is possible.

What would the legalities of holding that private information be and what are the legalities of third parties requesting copies of it?

• Do Rights of Information or Data Protection apply to 501 c registered orgs?

I always though one of the injustices of CU was that they never told one on the basis of what evidence they were making their decision, neither the rightfully accused nor innocent.

I know because I have been absolutely wrongly accused on may occasions ... wrong by nations or continents ... and even it is clearly wrong, have cultists like Bksimonb replace the bogus accusation to ramp up the accusations for future accusations.

Frankly, they might as well have a parrot jumping out of a cage onto cards or be reading the entrails of tortoises half the time.

This post has been edited by Cock-up-over-conspiracy: Mon 4th January 2010, 4:32pm

[The Adversary]

In certain contentious areas, banning/blocking editors is a complete fools game...as the recent http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Soc...oCal100/Archive showed.


The sock-master is probably(?) ..possibly(?) User:İsarig...who is topic-banned from the İ/P-area. However, as no-one seems to care/keep record, in the ''best case scenario'': ''Topic-banned'' on WP means in effect banned for 3 months...as that is as long as İP's are kept! LOL!

(BTW, Jaayjg used to keep permanent files on his, eh, adversaries: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex/User:Jayjg/ (some files have been deleted). )


...this got me thinking: in traditional Greek mythology, the work of Sisyphus was a punishment from the gods. But on WP, it is a punishment from.....from..?

[Premier player]

I wouldn't count on any information you receive here about checkuser to be accurate. The checkusers have lied in the past about what sorts of checks they have done, who they have checked, how long they were storing results, etc.

No doubt. Checkuser would be a less potent weapon were the punters to know all its ins and outs. The version used on WMF sites is significantly different from what comes with the software. For example, the latter only records the IPs of file edits and suchlike whereas the former also records the IPs of e-mails and admin actions. In fact, so far as I can tell, the only time WMF sites don't log IPs is when a checkuser is done - boom, boom!

Also, you have to distinguish what a checkuser can tell and the info hidden in the database that a developer could extract. It's presumably true that a checkuser can only go back three months, but the IPs are there forever.

[SB_Johnny]

It's hard to overstate how silly these guessing games are.

Which is part of why we don't ever answer questions about it: having the straight dope would undoubtedly take away an opportunity for conspiracy theorizing ;-)

[Somey]

Officially, The Wikipedia Review doesn't condone (nor does it condemn) the use of multiple accounts on Wikipedia, for any purpose. Moreover, I personally don't edit or otherwise participate directly at Wikipedia, under any account name. Nevertheless, I've collected a variety of useful tips over the years. Here are just a few:

• Change your underwear between sessions, since this will give you that "fresh" feeling. Also, squeeze a lemon into your underwear occasionally, for added "freshness."
• If you're going to use multiple proxies in order to have your accounts appear to reside in widely-dispersed locations, be sure to have a subcutaneous GPS tracking chip implanted in your arm, so that in case things get really confusing you can find yourself later.
• Try to remember that the term "sock puppet" doesn't necessarily mean you should wear an actual sock over your head while you use the computer. If you forget this and place one over your head anyway, be sure the sock has a breathing hole, to avoid suffocation.
• If you absolutely must create a "cast of characters" who are familiar to (and cooperate with) each other online, it's usually a good idea to make one of the characters a Neanderthal caveman from 100,000 years ago, since this might lead to your being included in a GEICO commercial. Also, small talking lizard characters are good for this.
• Don't post a photograph of an attractive female on your Wikipedia user page and then say it's you, even if you're an attractive female, and even if the female actually is you. Or, if you do, use Photoshop to superimpose a cute puppy in front of the attractive female. This will serve as a warning message to potential CheckUsers: Don't mess with me, I have a dog.
• Avoid having your alternate accounts use phrases like "top dollar," "rock bottom," or "hard cheese" on talk pages. Instead, use "expensive," "lousy," and "dry cheddar."
• Before beginning your campaign, be sure to read everything on Template:Unpsychlopedia, at least twice. In particular, this article. If possible, "spam" these links to other websites as well, such as The Wikipedia Review.
• Remember that your ability to "role-play" while online is influenced by easily-altered environmental factors, such as the genre of "now-playing" background music, available snack food/beverages, the color of sweater your dog is wearing, and the type of underwear you currently have on (see above). Also, while the human brain cannot comprehend the size of the world or its population in real terms, it's usually able to comprehend the amount of luncheon meat in your refrigerator, and can use that information for planning future sandwich-making activities. However, once the amount of luncheon meat exceeds roughly 300 lbs., it may be time to buy a second refrigerator.
• Since it's important that your multiple accounts are seen as editing at different times of the day, it's a good idea to get up and manually adjust the hands of any clocks that might be nearby before starting an editing session.
• Civility is important, but it's no substitute for a well-equipped, modern air force.

Needless to say, none of these tips should be used as the basis for any actual cash wager.