On 27/08/07, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
On 27/08/07, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you, Fred. That was really all that anyone needs to know - that Jayjg is informed of the situation and is working with Arbcom to address matters. I am sure many editors were concerned at Jayjg's on-wiki absence, if for no other reason than that a long serving editor who holds amongst the highest level of rights should be informed of the issues before the Arbcom that directly relate to him. At the same time, many of us have not established a "personal" relationship with Jayjg and thus would be hesitant to involve ourselves in what would clearly be an unpleasant situation.
I agree entirely.
However, there is one thing that needs to be said: describing as "a lie" the comment that Jayjg is absent (which he is, as far as we ordinary plebs can see) is unhelpful - unless there's proof that Frank was aware that Jayjg was not absent before his email of 1752UTC today.
True... a lie is not anything one disagrees with, but rather intentional and vocal deception.