[WikiEN-l] Another "BADSITES" controversy

[Slim Virgin]

On 5/30/07, Joe Szilagyi <szilagyi at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/30/07, Slim Virgin <slimvirgin at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > With the latter, all we'd have to do is e-mail the link, or a
> > screenshot of the post, to the ArbCom.
>
>
> Two problems:
>
> 1. Screenshots are trivially easy to forge. AGF, and all, but no one should
> trust screenshots in general.

In that case, the person concerned would be able to say they didn't post it.

> 2. How would people be able to know what evidence was being presented
> against them, to refute/endorse/comment on it, or for others to do so?
> Secret evidence?
>
E-mailing evidence to the ArbCom is common, particularly with issues
relating to real identities and similar. The ArbCom then makes the
decision whether the other party needs to be told about it. All of
that can be done without the material having to be posted publicly.

I find it odd that people are struggling to come up with examples of
when a link to one of these toxic sites might be necessary. :-)