`*A real grab bag there. **The auditing panel's purpose should be to provide transparency and accountability to Oversight and Checkuser.  The manner in which that purpose is achieved is likely to involve responding to complaints from the community, responding to issues raised by other Checkusers and Oversighter, and maybe some self-initiated actions.  Responding means asking questions of the various parties and making some kind of public statement about the finding. **The Checkuser log has a ``reason`` field, it should always be filled out with an informative comment.  However, requiring checkusers to maintain separate records is a very bad idea.  Data retained by Checkusers is theoretically subject to subpoena just like the Checkuser logs from the Foundation.  If someone wants to force the Foundation to disclose someone's IP (for libel in a BLP for example), a clever and wiki-wise lawyer would also subpoena the Foundation to reveal the names and addresses of any Checkuser who ran a related check and then subpoena the Checkuser to turn over any data that was retained personally.  Since Checkuser data expires after a given time, personal records kept by Checkusers could be a goldmine of information for the right litigant.  It should be up to the individual Checkuser to decide whether they want to take that risk, and which cases (if any) and what information (if any) to retain.  Mandating it would make them all potentially subject to the hassle of responding to subpoenas.  **If a Checkuser fails to leave an informative log summary and, when contacted by the panel, is unable to satisfactorily explain a check, that can be taken into account by the panel. Like any jury, the panel can decide for itself whether a claim of ``I don't remember`` is credible or evasion. **The primary goal is transparency and responsibility.  I don't see any reason not to take old cases.  Sometimes there will be enough information in the log to answer (especially regarding Oversight, since the diff itself is now visible via the log) and if there is not, a polite, ``We looked into your complaint but determined that too much time had elapsed to do a proper investigation`` will have to do.  Certainly whatever page is set up to describe the process should include advice to make complaints as timely as possible.    `