On 11/15/07, Durova nadezhda.durova@gmail.com wrote:
Alec wrote:
There problem we do have is much much smaller, and relates more to incivility and NPA than to the banning policy. It involves not seriously believing people to BE a banned user, but sort of loosely tossing around the accusations of a vague sort of link to banned users. "Supporting" the banned user. "Agreeing with" the banned user. "Friends with" the banned user. "Your buddy" the banned user.
Such statements often have a bit more behind them than the people who make them are at liberty to disclose openly.
Oh Lordy, Durova-- that's true, there are cases like that but it's an incredibly dangerous direction. Secret claims the accused person can't rebut. Secret claims that can't be discussed in public. And as you imply, "doube secret" evidence-- where not only is the specific content of the evidence secret, but even the existence of such evidence might be secret (or at least unknown).
Maybe there's some secret evidence that suggests DanT really is in league with WR? Maybe there's some evidence that GTBacchus really is an advocate sent by ED? Maybe even there's some secret evidence being spread against me???
I hope not. And I hope no one will assume that "somebody must know something, or else they wouldn't make the allegation" the next time somebody throws out one of those "How's your buddy Awbry doing" jokes that are so common round here.
For my part, I will henceforth assume that there IS no secret evidence in all discusion I'm aware of, unless somebody specifically tells me otherwise. AGF _must_ entail Assume There's No Secret Evidence Out There Against the Person.
Alec
(as a personal trophy-- I made it through that entire email without once using a metaphor involving ANY past or present political event involving secret evidence or secret trials, including, but not limited to: the Spanish Inquisition, Stalinist Russian, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, The Magna Carta, Acts 25:16, or Guantanemo Bay. And boy, that's not easy for a nut like me to do, so go me! visions of all of them were dancing in my head through that whole email, but Wikipedia is NOT the real world, Blocking is NOT execution, an Arbcom case is not a trial, Durova is a kind intelligent person and NOT a fascist dictator, and I am NOT a member of any resistance party about to restore my nation to freedom. But I hafta say-- the temptation was heavy hehehe)