QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 17th November 2011, 1:43pm)
![*](style_images/brack/post_snapback.gif)
QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Thu 17th November 2011, 5:55am)
![*](style_images/brack/post_snapback.gif)
A couple of things were missing from that account:
1. Ironholds was the one who outed Law via an IRC chat.
2. Six weeks prior to this mess blowing up, Keegan had emailed arbitrator John Vandenberg stating that Law was a sockpuppet. JVB claimed that he didn't read the email, though almost nobody believes that statement.
3. Arbcom was specifically asked by the "community" whether they could answer a simple yes-or-no question on whether they were aware that Law was a sockpuppet. Half of Arbcom refused to answer a simple yes-or-no question and Risker even tried to censor that aspect of the discussion.
Arbcom has no problems with sockpuppets, as long as the puppeteers are friends or members of the committee.
Thanks. Do you have any dates for the off-wiki bits. When was the IRC chat?
[edit] Just found this
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=317444073 09:37, 2 October 2009 John Vandenberg.
QUOTE
It was brought to my attention this morning, about 9 hours ago, that a functionary had privately informed me on August 21 about the connection between Law and The undertow. The email that I received, which was sent to the audit subcommittee this morning and will be send to arbcom-l shortly, did not spell out the connection explicitly, and I can't be certain that I had even read the email until this morning. The day the original email arrived was the due date for the ERA submission for which I was responsible. My apologies for adding to the recent confusion, especially to the functionary who believed that they had elevated the matter to the committee appropriately. I dropped the ball, and didn't go back to pick it up once I had more time on my hands. However I never "knew" of the connection, nor have I ever been on friendly terms with either of these accounts. My interaction is limited to actioning an unrelated oversight request from Law, and possibly communications with The undertow on IRC prior to the desysop (I don't have logs). As a result of my position in this matter being complicated by this, I will recuse from any further involvement. If this, or any other error on my part, has resulted in a loss of confidence, I will be happy to submit to a re-election. (see also my recall pledge) John Vandenberg (chat) 09:36, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
And here is the poll of Arbitrators
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...n_4_days_ago.3F Corrrect, half of them refused to answer.
Note the comment here
QUOTE
The work that the Committee does in private is done so because it is not appropriate for public viewing. Simple. AGK 20:24, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...John_Vandenberg AGK is currently a candidate for this years elections. Obviously he has been in training for this.
This post has been edited by Peter Damian: