On 17/06/07, jayjg jayjg99@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/17/07, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
On 17/06/07, jayjg jayjg99@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/17/07, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
On 17/06/07, jayjg jayjg99@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/17/07, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
AGF lasts only until proven that it shouldn't.
In my case, of course, it never started, and were is the EVIDENCE that it now "shouldn't".
Your behaviour in perpetually failing to answer a straight question from me with a straight answer.
As opposed to CW's identical behavior?
Which straight questions from me has she not answered?
CW hasn't answered straight questions from me, but you have continually excused that, and come up with all sorts of farfetched reasons why she might not do so. Remember? That's the good faith you extended to CW but refused to extend to me.
If you had simply answered two straight questions from me, then I would consider the implications of CW's failure to answer a straight question of yours.
I am now minded to believe that you will never answer these two questions.
Well, as explained before, I've already answered one of the questions,
I asked you for a link to that, since it wasn't answered in this thread. You didn't answer that, either.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Uncle_uncle_uncle#TOR_proxy_users
That doesn't answer the question; you refer to the public naming of Tor users, whereas I was asking about the private communication with them.
A number of CheckUsers were aware of CW's use of TOR proxies; I don't know if any of them notified her that it was a policy violation. I did not contact her about it.
Ah, at last. Thank you.
So presumably you only consider it a problem that Admins/candidates follow (this particular) policy, not that ordinary users do?
The entire tone of your e-mails have been hostile from the start, and have shown a rather absurd double standard which you have yet to acknowledge.
False. I have already explained why I hold you, as a CU, to a higher standard than "ordinary" editors - you have additional powers and, hence, additional responsibilities.