On Nov 30, 2007 10:21 AM, Risker
<risker.wp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/30/07, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com
> wrote:
>
> On 30/11/2007, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 21:17:14 -0500, "Alec Conroy"
> > <alecmconroy(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >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 arbitrators *already had* that evidence, there was no need for
> Giano to post anything.
Indeed. Giano appears to have primarily been going for making a big
splash, i.e. drama-queening.
- d.
David and Guy, both Paul August (in the ANI subpage) and Mackensen (on
the
Proposed Decisions talk page) have stated that
Arbcom did *not* receive
a
copy of the list post; it appears that many
members of Arbcom first saw
Durova's post when Giano published it on ANI.
The Arbitration Committee list was forwarded a copy of the list post
with the express permission of Durova *well before* Giano posted it to
AN/I.
The post was forwarded *four days* after the original block -- only *hours*
before Giano posted it on AN/I.