Jimbo, my offer to un-ban RK unilaterally was only a response to his expression of concern that he might (as you put it)

* be banned "any moment now, for absolutely no reason at all".

Since I am a computer programmer, I expected that my valiant offer would be parsed by the usual rules of formal logic. It only applied to a ban that would be (A) sudden and (B) for no reason.

If I led Robert on, i.e., if he interpreted my offer as some kind of trump card or "Get Out Of Jail Free Card", then I may have done him a disservice. But that was not my intention. I was disappointed that he did not let me know what was happening, and as he never mentioned it again to me I soon forgot about it.

Ironically, the very day the ban was announced he blithely pounded another nail into his coffin by insinuating a fellow contributor was a "Nazi"; I distinctly remembering using HTML strikeout codes to draw his attention to this error.

I can't help someone who won't listen. But I am convinced that, if RK had followed my advice, there is NO WAY the arbcom would have banned him. Because my advice would have been to stop using inflammatory language in talk pages and edit summaries.

My offer only applied to RK being suddenly, unreasonably banned. It was not an offer to let him continue a pattern of unchecked provocations. It was not an offer to subvert the rule of law, but a remedy against what he complained of: a possible arbitrary ruling which would IGNORE the rule of law.

Anyway, whether my 'offer' had any influence or not, the upshot is that the arbcom delivered an airtight decision: one which not even our most anarchic of contrarians (The Cunctator) has objected to.

I wish Robert well, and I hope that when he returns in mid-February, he will make more effort to get along with the other contributors.

-----Original Message----- From: Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales [mailto:jwales@wikia.com] Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 1:21 PM To: English Wikipedia Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Why didn't you ask for help? (was: Hateful ban)

Just to inject a bit of legal formalism here, if RK had sought and followed Ed's advice, and the arbcom banned him anyway, and Ed unblocked him anyway, Ed would be in the wrong. We have worked very hard to put into place the "rule of law" as opposed to arbitrary individual bans/unbans, and I intend to vigorously defend that.

--Jimbo

Poor, Edmund W wrote:

...

RK,

Perhaps I was less than clear. My offer to un-ban you was

CONDITIONAL

...

on your seeking out my advice and following it. My promise was (and still is):

• No one who seeks out my help and follows my advice ever comes to

harm.

I have had no messages from you, either in private e-mail, the Wikipedia mailing list, or the Wikipedia website. I can't

help someone

...

who refuses to communicate.

Now I must ask you the same question I asked Lir:

• What advice of mine did you ever follow?

Sadly,

Ed Poor