As Wikipedians were forced to visit this less censored forum to view Durova’s secret evidence against User:!!, many of them found something they might not have expected from this “attack site”: reasoned and timely criticism, the kind which nowadays can earn the critic a block or a ban on Wikipedia.

Did we made a difference? Damn straight we did. Two of the three arbitrators we observed should have recused themselves from this case subsequently changed their vote to oppose the proposed ban of Giano:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=174931959

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=175017388

Meanwhile, it seems the clerk for this case, Cbrown1023, has erred in marking remedy eight, a “reminder” to Giano, as “passed”:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...#Giano_reminded

The remedy gained six supports, three opposes, and one abstain:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=174928140

But the language at the top of the page provides:

<s>Nowhere does it say that an abstain vote changes the majority required to pass, whereas the stipulation “For this case…7 votes are a majority” is quite clear.</s>

CORRECTION:
Cbrown1023 pointed out on my user talk page that the arbitration policy page does, in fact, provide for a lowered majority requirement in the case of an abstention:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=174195086

Good for us! We do make a difference. Now, everybody (who can!) needs to vote Giano and Moreschi in the upcoming arb-com elections!

Hey, before we move on to the elections can somebody help me with a fact question that either wasn't answered or I more likely missed something. What was the exact chain of custody of the the email from posting to the investigations group to Giano? Was he a member of the group? Did someone else in the group give it to him? Do we just not know?

Giano wasn't on the list. I think I know who forwarded it to him, but I don't think it would be fair to say. PM me if you want to know Oh and it's not a secret it's just what I've gathered from reading people's talkpages.

As to who the person before him got it from, or whether they were on the list, I don't know but perhaps assume so.

Was it the investigations list? The claim on wikien-l is that it was posted to the cyberstalking list.

I think you're right. I need to make a list list.

Leave me off it — I am feeling far too listless.

Jonny

User:!! has already admitted to being the person who forwarded Durova's hyper-paranoid noodlings to Giano.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=174917430

Slimmy has been trying for the past 12 hours or so to use this as a pretext for getting Kelly Martin banninated... or maybe she wants James F off the ArbCom list, it's hard to tell what the hell's going on. Anyhoo, presumably she wants people to think the "leak" came from there instead of from the (far more likely) sooper-sekrit "cyberstalking" (i.e., "obsessing about criticism") or "investigations" (i.e., "witch-hunt") lists.

I hope she succeeds, actually...

My guess would be that everyone on the witch-hunt list sent it to him as soon as they got it, because each of them would have wanted to be first. It's very competitive over there, you know!

SlimVirgin's paranoia really does know almost no bounds.

Although I wonder why !! never came forward about it before?

I might guess Dmcdevit to be the ultimate source of the leak. Of course, that's only speculation.

That would be LOL, since he's the one who initiated the Durova case.

SlimVirgin said that there had been leaks to Kelly Martin and the ever-charming Cyde. ("Cyde actually told me himself on one occasion that he knew what I had written to ArbCom.") The most likely candidate for that would Jdforrester.

Anyways he always seemed to be a jackal at heart.

WP needs to have a Writ of Habeas Evidensus Aginus.