On Wednesday, June 16th, 2004, at 09:50 Delirium wrote:
Fred Bauder wrote:
I am trying to get an arbitration ruling on this
as part of Wik2.
Better evidence that the vandal bot is actually Wik would be helpful.
I'm not sure this is really something the arbitration committee
needs to deal with.
I agree.
If Wik ran a vandal bot, I assume there's a
consensus to ban him.
Well, it's clear and established policy (for once), so, yes.
So it seems to be simply a matter of facts (was the
vandal bot Wik
or not?), and the arbitration committee has no particular knowledge
that the general community doesn't have when it comes to deciding
that issue.
The evidence available, though circumstantial, is rather significant.
Yours,
--
James D. Forrester
Mail: james(a)jdforrester.org | jon(a)eh.org | james.forrester(a)orange.net
csvla(a)dcs.warwick.ac.uk || [[en:User:Jdforrester]] on Wikipedia
IM : ICQ:15108888 | MSN:jamesdforrester@hotmail.com | YM:Jdforrester