On Nov 29, 2007 7:44 PM, Sam Blacketer <sam.blacketer(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
On Nov 30, 2007 12:16 AM, Alec Conroy
<alecmconroy(a)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.