On Nov 29, 2007 9:17 PM, Alec Conroy alecmconroy@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/29/07, Mark Ryan ultrablue@gmail.com wrote:
What I would like to know (and I'm not going to bother digging through hundreds of emails on this topic to see if it's already been asked) is which arbitrators are members of that private/secret mailing list, and if some arbitrators are members of that list or, further, participated in discussions, then which of those arbitrators have recused themselves from this case.
If I am correct (somebody speak up if I'm not) I believe both Flonight and Morven are confirmed to have participated in both secret lists
There are no secret lists, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.
Despite participating in the lists and receiving the "evidence" email, no arbiter has agreed yet agreed to recuse themselves. Flonight and Morven are currently the deciding votes in a split-decision at the Arbcom case proposing to ban Giano for 90 days for revealing the evidence that exonerated !!.
The proposal is not to ban Giano for "revealing the evidence that exonerated !!"; indeed, that evidence has never been presented publicly. The ArbCom has stated its issues with Giano quite clearly here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Durova_and_J... and it has nothing to do with what you have said.
I wonder if your mis-representation of ArbCom statements is deliberate or not?