On 12 Sep 2007 at 17:45:24 -0400, "Gregory Maxwell" gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:
I've been told on no uncertain terms that the arbcom has endorsed no such position.
I've also now spoken to foundation staff and heard what I could only describe as nearly the opposite response.
OK... so here's where we apparently are:
Some not completely stated group of people met in secret. This group included people with a strong emotional involvement in one side of a raging dispute, and some relatively neutral parties, but (apparently) nobody from the other side of the dispute. People could make accusations regarding the behavior of outside parties who had no opportunity to respond or defend, and were listened to and heeded in proportion to the degree of emotion they put into their claims of being attacked or harrassed. Ultimately, some resolution was allegedly reached, but no formal announcement was made, and people who were involved have differing impressions as to what was the actual final decision. This decision, though nobody actually knows for sure what it is, is now allegedly binding policy on Wikipedia.