On Nov 29, 2007 7:44 PM, Sam Blacketer sam.blacketer@googlemail.com wrote:
On Nov 30, 2007 12:16 AM, Alec Conroy alecmconroy@gmail.com wrote:
Alec, how can people show you e-mails they say don't exist to begin
with?
I'm sorry, but to my knowledge, nobody has actually seriously said such conversations don't exist.
That's asking people to prove a negative. Has Durova, or has anyone else who was actually party to discussions, said anything that indicates there ever was a discussion offwiki on the specific subject of whether !! should be banned?
"Banned", "blocked", "investigated". I don't see how it makes a difference in this particular case.
Durova has said multiple times that there were in-depth discussions and enthusiastic support.
"In-depth discussions" of what, exactly? An in-depth discussion of the suspicion that !! might be a reincarnation of a banned user, and enthusiastic support for more investigation is not the same as enthusiastic support for an immediate block.
No, it's not, but given the incredibly naive investigative technique described in the email made public, either is cause for concern.