On Nov 27, 2007 10:16 PM, jayjg <jayjg99(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Regarding a reasonable reaction to the sockpuppeting claim, as Matthew
points out "She was completely right, as far as I know, that !! was a
returned user grooming an account for adminship. She was wrong in
making the unsupported leap beyond that - that this meant it was a
banned user
grooming an account for adminship - and discounting all other
possibilities."
Yes, of course. That's really what everyone said after the block, on the
noticeboards even when the evidence was not known. The question is why
nobody said that who actually saw the evidence. The expectation of some of
us is because nobody thought it was that big a deal. This is not
representative of the project in general. Again, an echo chamber.
RR