On Dec 10, 2007 10:15 PM, Ken Arromdee <arromdee(a)rahul.net> wrote:
That works only for !!, not for future recurrences of
the same situation
involving other users. !!'s innocence was conclusively demonstrated
through the posting of an email that embarassed Durova, and which Durova
did her best to keep third parties from seeing.
I recall !! was unblocked significantly before that email was posted -
because some users knew that user's previous identity and because
people examined !!'s contribution history and found nothing
problematic.
Durova's email showed fairly convincingly that there was no secret
damning evidence, however.
-Matt