This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Wnt (talk | contribs) at 20:38, 27 June 2011 (→Re: Outside view by Gamaliel). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 20:38, 27 June 2011 by Wnt (talk | contribs) (→Re: Outside view by Gamaliel)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Alleged cavassing
I do not consider this to be canvassing, and in any case, it's had no immediate effect, as I responded to put off the work. Bearian (talk) 17:29, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Re: Outside view by Gamaliel
I agree that it looks like some of the charges are just throwing everything at him to see if something sticks. But there are also some legitimate charges in there as well. This RFC seems to be treating Cirt like OJ Simpson--like the police then, we're trying to frame someone who's guilty anyway. It's bad for the police to use bogus evidence, but ultimately, OJ did do the deed he was accused of. Ken Arromdee (talk) 19:36, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- Gamaliel's comment seems to ridicule Jayen's evidence without any substantive analysis (which is rather ironic). I'd also like to add that Prioryman's claim about wikihounding is an exaggeration. I commented at the linked to discussion and Jayen was not "heavily criticized." Indeed the thread went nowhere and people suggested RFC/U as the appropriate courses of action if either editor had complaints about the other. On that point, the arbs also suggested RFC/U when they declined the RFAr that Coren started about Cirt and the Santorum issue. I don't see how posting notice to each arbitrator about the RFC/U individually (as opposed to on a much more public noticeboard) amounts to "canvassing." People should look at all the evidence and decide for themselves what may or may not have merit. Many will undoubtedly find, as Ken has, that even if some of it seems overly ambitious there are very clearly troubling bits in there as well. Cheers.Griswaldo (talk) 20:09, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
- If there's a legitimate charge in there I'd like to know what it is. It would save us all so much time. Wnt (talk) 20:38, 27 June 2011 (UTC)