On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 19:45:48 -0500, Anthony <wikimail(a)inbox.org>
wrote:
I guess I can't. Is the point you're arguing
about that "Durova"
merely discussed "the investigation" with five people, and not "the
block"? Because if so, I don't see the difference. The mere fact
that she discussed that twisted "investigation" with people is enough
for us to ask for more information.
Which you have been given.
Durova discussed the information - and the result was that people
agreed this was undoubtedly not a new user. This is now established
as undisputed fact. It's also pretty clear that they were pitching
for adminship. What was missing was (a) any evidence of wrongdoing
and (b) and indication that Durova was intending to block.
What you need here is Hanlon's Razor.
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG