On Nov 29, 2007 9:17 PM, Alec Conroy <alecmconroy(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/29/07, Mark Ryan <ultrablue(a)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_…
and it has nothing to do with what you have said.
I wonder if your mis-representation of ArbCom statements is deliberate or not?