On 28/05/07, Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
It's pretty clear that it's not what we're supposed to be doing, and that interpreting arbcom decisions as definitive guides to policy in all cases is apt to error. Given the brief nature of arbcom decisions, we don't go into sufficient detail as to reasoning and the like, so taking an aspect of our decision apart from the case it was attached to may lack important nuance.
This is the sort of thing I mean when I say "take care not to craft a stick for idiots." I suppose I should amend that to "for idiocy."
- d.