powercorrupts --
I don't object to you calling anyone a fruitcake, regardless of whether or not I would agree with that assessment. I just object to people being told to shut up because they are fruitcakes, because fruitcakes, or people perceived as being fruitcakes, have rights to opinions too.
In my completely non-professional opinion -- that is, as a concerned citizen, not a lawyer -- I think it is dangerous to go too close suggesting someone, particularly someone with an actual name linked to their internet name, may the same person as someone who once had a collection of CP, particularly without solid evidence. Not to say that it would be bad to seek further evidence in order to confirm or deny any suspicions that one may or may not have, but it's wise to avoid publicly voicing an opinion, particularly a "guilty" opinion, before all cards are on the table. Sometimes newspapers delay naming the guilty party until the courts have actually given a guilty verdict. Not that Encyclopedist sounds like someone particularly likely to sue, but that reserving judgment, at least publicly, would seem to be wise generally speaking.
Criticizing him for stuff done by an account we known he had on Wikipedia is of course entirely different. Since it is confirmed he owned the account in question, it is reasonable to assume that, absent any complaints of account theft, that he actually did the things done by the account.
|