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

[Kwan Ting Chan]

On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 23:18 -0600, SlimVirgin wrote:
> I have no idea who these e-mails and chats were with, and I see no
> point in pursuing it, except to make trouble. Durova has resigned her
> adminship and lost the chance to stand for ArbCom -- a heavy price to
> pay for a mistake. As others have pointed out, the five editors she
> discussed it with may not even realize themselves who they are,
> because Durova may have mistaken no objections for positive feedback
> -- or she may have thought  that feedback about her case study was the
> same as feedback about a block. So the implication that there are five
> editors somewhere in hiding, letting Durova face the music alone,
> misses the point that they may have said X, but Durova heard Y. There
> is therefore no point in conducting a witchhunt.

The point that some in this thread wanting to make, is that there's no
way for the community to know whether its the case Durova heard Y when X
was said, or whether she heard Y because that was what was said by the
people she discussed it with, unless what was discussed is known.

And if its the latter case, the community would want to know, as argued
by the editors wanting to know more, who those 5 were so that it can pay
a closer attention to their judgements.

There is no point in conducting a witchhunt if its the former case, but
the argument is that we cannot see (and hence decide) if it's actually
the latter case.

KTC

-- 
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
  - Heinrich Heine
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20071129/ac2f3521/attachment.pgp