Fred Bauder wrote:
An appeal is not futile. For one thing the policy might be changed or it might be decided the policy which exists does not apply in this case.
Again, I wish to read this policy. Where is it published? And how was it established? Did the ArbCom itself author it?
If a close examination of his editing record shows no activist activity, it might be considered unfair to do external research which established his identity.
There has been no _assertion_ of activist activity on the wiki. Shall we go ahead and block everyone pending close examination of their editing records?
But then, if Ryan could do it, anyone, including an investigative journalist could have done it.
Yes, and the same applies to murderers, rapists and neo-Nazis in our midst. This is not a "slippery slope" argument (a contention that we'll be banning those editors next). I'm asking how it would be worse for an investigative journalist to discover that a pedophile is editing than to discover that a murderer, rapist or neo-Nazi is editing.