Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Fæ (/Fae/Ash), Quick, send a dossier to ArbCom and delete! Options

[carbuncle]

(mod note: "Conflicts of interest, paedophila images" subtitle added)
(mod note: See previous topic, 'Wikimedia UK's Fæ, A new name for an old face', for background)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Fæ.

Should we start a betting pool on how long it stays up and who closes/deletes it?

[carbuncle]

Let's talk about "blackmail" for a second, since it is mentioned in that ANI thread. Here is the "blackmail threat" posted on Fæ's Commons talk page during their RfA:

If the pictures are not of you...
Then sending them (there are always copies) to your civil partner should be no big deal. Yes/no? 98SA447 (talk) 07:47, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't know who this was (it wasn't me). Note that there is no mention of the RfA (which was sinking like a concrete warship by this point anyway). Note also that it is not even in the traditional form of unless you do x, I will do y. There isn't even any implied action that Fæ might take to avoid this. A threat, certainly, but is it blackmail or simply trolling?

[Peter Damian]

Let's talk about "blackmail" for a second, since it is mentioned in that ANI thread. Here is the "blackmail threat" posted on Fæ's Commons talk page during their RfA:

If the pictures are not of you...
Then sending them (there are always copies) to your civil partner should be no big deal. Yes/no? 98SA447 (talk) 07:47, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't know who this was (it wasn't me). Note that there is no mention of the RfA (which was sinking like a concrete warship by this point anyway). Note also that it is not even in the traditional form of unless you do x, I will do y. There isn't even any implied action that Fæ might take to avoid this. A threat, certainly, but is it blackmail or simply trolling?

I think it crossed an ethical line, as Greg would say. But anyway, why is Wikipedia Review being tarred with this brush? And it detracts from the main point, which is that there is no 'outing' in the standard sense here. That Fae=Van Haeften is public domain. What is not in the public domain is that Van Haeften = some user who left under a cloud.

The main argument now gaining ascendancy on the RfC is the 'Balloonman' one that voters at the RfA were told that it was a clean start, that they did not oppose, and so everything is OK.