Multiple choice question: Why is Arbcom unable to examine the BLP issue, and should disqualify itself as utterly incompetent, and admit that the BLP issue cannot be solved given the nature of Wikipedia specifically, and Web 2.0 crowdsourcing in general?
A. The Brandt case is
too embarrassing for Wikipedia and would invite adverse publicity.
B. Brandt is banned and everyone on Arbcom is prohibited from mentioning his name.
C. The Brandt bio is scraped and still available all over the web, which means that any BLP remediation efforts by Wikipedia, at any given time, cannot solve the problem for the BLP victim. Wikipedia does not claim copyright on the defamatory and/or privacy-invasive information it publishes, the Foundation disclaims all responsibility, and no one can stop the scrapers even if the article is deleted.