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

[Charlotte Webb]

On 11/29/07, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually, you do know for sure. Matt said it, Guy said it, Slim said
> it, and I'm sure they all "have a generally accurate idea as to what,
> if anything, was actually said."

Actually Slim seems to be speculating as much as everybody else.

> > On 11/28/07, SlimVirgin <slimvirgin at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > As others have pointed out, the five editors she discussed it with may
> > > not even realize themselves who they are,

Maybe she's not sure if she herself is one of them. Assuming she's not
one of the alleged "five editors", maybe if she does know who at least
some of them are, and could easily contact them and determine whether
or not they themselves know who they are, that is, whether any of them
knows that he or she is (anonymously) being referred to by Durova and
critics as part of a specific group of five, and whether they have any
objection (which, too, would probably have to be voiced anonymously)
to the way things are turning out.

As near as I recall, Matt and Guy have only expressed awareness of the
"evidence" which Durova posted to some private mailing list, which by
now we've all seen, and which didn't actually mention the notion of
blocking the user, and which apparently did not attract any (on-list
-- "public" would obviously not be the right word) replies prior to
the block.

If this is true, any further communication between Durova and five or
more other people would have been by some other medium, and we are now
willing to admit that these people might not be certain who they
themselves are, whether or not they exist, or whether or not anything
they might have heard from (or said to) Durova may have factored into
Durova's decision-making, or whether a reasonable observer would
consider the incident to be partly anyone else's fault.

Forget the names. I don't see any evidence that anybody except for
Durova knows what's really going on here.

—C.W.