On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 21:27:20 -0800, Durova nadezhda.durova@gmail.com wrote:
Neither checkuser nor sockpupet investigation is 100% accurate. We do our best, but no human endeavor is going to be perfect. When people seek to resolve the mistakes in a reasonable way these things get cleared up pretty quickly.
This is true. The problem here is when the banned users themselves continue stirring up shit, and draw in a never-ending succession of new participants to the debate.
Why is "there is absolutely no evidence to support this fatuous assertion made by a banned user in order to advance his grievance against Wikipedia" never an acceptable answer?
We had an allegation made by banned user Greg Kohs against two admins, brought to us by a sockpuppets and open proxies, and several people tried to pick it up and run with it despite the substance of the allegation already having been thoroughly refuted by the admins in question.
That is, in my view, a serious concern.
Guy (JzG)