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

[Wily D]

On 11/29/07, Sam Blacketer <sam.blacketer at googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 29, 2007 10:09 PM, Matthew Brown <morven at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > I'm not sure if Durova's exact words were that others had approved the
> > block or others had simply agreed with her that the user was
> > suspicious - can anyone clarify?
> >
>
> The full quote:
>
> "Roughly two dozen people received the report. Those included people from
> the Foundation, and some (not all) members of ArbCom, and some people who
> had checkuser privileges. I did not run this through the Committee formally
> and received no explicit assurance that any checkuser had been run. I
> discussed the investigation in depth with roughly five people, all sleuths
> like myself. The information was actually very simple to disprove with one
> key fact one fact. None of the people who responded had access to that key
> fact. The responses I did receive ranged from positive to enthusiastic. I'm
> certain we all would have changed our minds immediately if that key
> information had been available to us."
> (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2007/Candidate_statements/Durova/Questions_for_the_candidate#Question_from_Lawrence_Cohen
> )
>
> This is unclear to the extent that Durova does not say to which particular
> aspect the responses were "postive to enthusiastic"; many people have been
> jumping to the conclusion that this was to a proposal to block !!, but it
> could just have been to the suggestion that !! was a reincarnation of
> another user.
>
> --
> Sam Blacketer
> London E15
My previous post seems to be in error.

Cheers
WilyD