[WikiEN-l] Missed Opportunities to have avoided the Durova Case

[Relata Refero]

On Nov 27, 2007 9:21 PM, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman at spamcop.net>
wrote:

> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:30:22 +1100, "private musings"
> <thepmaccount at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Here's a short few points from another in the thick of it;
> >   - I submitted private information to Guy via email, which he shared
> >   with this list despite my asking him clearly not to
>
> You think.  But that's not actually what I said.  I said I shared it
> with a few trusted individuals, and that's what I did.
>
> >   - Fellow list members 'reviewed' Guy's blocking of me, reblocked me,
> >   and then reviewed that block.
>
> Fellow *admins* reviewed that block.  There was also a discussion on
> the admin noticeboards.  And the consensus was that your use of
> multiple accounts was disruptive, but that you should be allowed to
> continue editing with one account.
>

This is the point at which my remarks, and those of others on the Durova
thread, on the 'echo chamber' of these lists becomes relevant: the
subsequent discussion at the admin noticeboard, where some people already
seemingly have their minds made up in advance of those seeing the
information for the first time. This is bad structure for efficient
decisionmaking if those seeing the evidence for the first time aren't really
representative of opinion.


>
> Your block was based 100% on your on-wiki behaviour, which is
> precisely why your arbitration case looks set to endorse the view
> that your use of multiple accounts was disruptive.
>

> No you;re not, you are undergoing an arbitration case which looks
> set to endorse the finding that your use of EIGHT separate accounts
> was well outside policy and community consensus.


I had no idea that voting had begun. Lets not pre-judge that one, shall we?
There are a few issues involved there which you're both glossing over.


RR