[WikiEN-l] SlimVirgin and CheckUser leaks

[SlimVirgin]

On 7/20/08, Charles Fulton <mackensen at gmail.com> wrote:
> No, that's not quite the case, and you've been told that before. I'll
>  repeat it again for the benefit of a wider audience.

What is not quite the case, Charles?
>
>  Lar came to me because he was understandably disturbed by some of his
>  findings and wanted my opinion before taking matters public. I
>  counseled Lar to do nothing because I had stumbled into the
>  'situation' several months previously, but did not feel that I could
>  disclose to Lar the full specifics until I had discussed the matter
>  with the other people involved. I will not, yet, name names, but they
>  included a member of the Arbitration Committee and another Checkuser.
>  I grant that I didn't see any particular urgency in the matter.

But that's not what Lar said. He told me in an e-mail that you had
advised him not to raise the check WITH ME. You had no business doing
that as Ombudsman. If you say now that you didn't give him this
advice, I believe you, but then we're back to the issue of spinning.
You can't both be right.

The point is, Charles, that from the very start, even before any of us
knew about the checkuser, you aided and abetted Lar in this situation,
rather than stepping back as Ombudsman and realizing that it was the
kind of thing you might be asked to adjudicate on. What is the point
of having an Ombudsman who is so deeply biased?