Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight/May 2010 election/Oversight/Closedmouth

Closedmouth
I'll keep this brief.

Been here since '05, admin since about a year ago, I mostly concern myself with so-called "gnomish" editing and adminning, so you've probably never heard of me. Typo fixing, deleting junk and dealing with vandals are my main areas of work, but I tend to flit about willy-nilly helping wherever I can.

I have made several requests for oversight over the years, all of which were carried out, and I have always felt it was an area I could potentially do good and helpful work in. I have the utmost respect for other people's right to privacy and I would do my best to make sure that our precious open editing policy doesn't allow for that privacy to be taken away.

I am currently in the timezone Universal Coordinated Time +10 and am available through IRC and email most hours of the afternoon, evening and night, which is apparently a valuable commodity around these parts.

Thank you for your time, I won't waste any more of it.

Comments and questions for Closedmouth
Apologies for the slow responses, I've had some real life distractions that I consider more important. --Closedmouth (talk) 07:07, 16 May 2010 (UTC) I know it is asked in the questionnaire:
 * Questions from HJ Mitchell
 * 1) If you are granted Oversight access, how do you think that will affect you as an editor and an administrator and do you think that will (or should) affect the way that other editors interact with you?
 * I can't imagine how it would change anything outside of the fact that I have an extra set of buttons. "Oversighter" is not a step up some imaginary ladder of authority, and I hope people would not perceive of it as such. I'll still be doing the things I do, just with some added responsibility behind the scenes.
 * 1) Do you feel it's important for oversighters to reply to email requests to inform the requester of the action you've taken or not taken?
 * When I made requests for suppression previously, I wasn't fussed if I didn't get a response in the event of my request being carried through with, it's easy enough to see that it's been done. On the other hand, if my request was declined, I would have expected a response detailing why, it's just common courtesy. I will reply to all oversight requests that I accept or decline, but whether or not others do is up to them.
 * Question from Keegan
 * 1) Q. How will you be willing to respond to saying no to a request, and will you actively do it?
 * Oversight is pretty much policy-bound, if something isn't covered by oversight policy, it's simple just to say "This request isn't covered by oversight policy, the material you refer to does not need to be oversighted" or something along those lines. So yes, to the second part.


 * Question from User:zzuuzz
 * Other than attempts at outing, what types of revisions should be hidden from administrators?
 * As little as possible, if we can help it, but any gross violations of law such as extensive copyright violations, libellous material, especially of living people, anything listed at Oversight basically. Policy is pretty cut and dry with this, and I don't intend to deviate from it.
 * Question from Happy-melon
 * 1) All CheckUsers and Oversighters are members of the functionaries-en mailing list, a forum for discussion and co-ordination of privacy-related issues which affect any and all areas of Wikipedia. What qualities and perspectives would you bring to such discussions?
 * I don't see what this has to do with me getting oversight, but I'll try to answer it anyway. I don't consider myself an outspoken person, and I have never contributed my own opinions to a mailing list, Wikimedia-related or otherwise. That being said, if I am called on to contribute, I will do my best to be honest, forthright and unbiased and to be informed about what I'm saying before I say it. I try to also be unswayed by petty politics, but I guess most people like to say that. I hope this is adequate, I was unsure how to approach this question.