Here's another hypothetical question; if WR
were posting what it
thought was the real name of a Wikipedia editor, and further asserting
that that person was a CIA spy, mentally unbalanced, and various other
similar claims, would you consider that "defamatory"? Or do WR posters
have a unique definition of defamatory that ends with "...except when
it's about Wikipedia editors, then anything goes."
There's a difference between saying "So-and-so is a CIA spy" and "I
think it possible that so-and-so is a CIA spy". Both are batshit insane
commentary, but only one is truly defamatory.
Wrapping some weasel words around defamation doesn't stop it from
being defamatory. Saying "it appears that this person was a CIA agent"
is the same as saying that they are one.