Academic Kids talk:Requests for arbitration/Lir/Evidence
|
|
Hearsay and out-of-context statements
- Comrade_Nick: lir wanted to ruin you
- Snowspinner: I imagine he still does. I think he'd have a tough time of it.
- Comrade_Nick: he wanted to nomate you so no one will vote for you
- Comrade_Nick: adam (lir) wanted me to vandalize your page guanaco when you banned his editing saddam hussein account
- Comrade_Nick: he wanted me to repalace you bottle fed lamb with cock fed lamb...
This is clearly hearsay. It is not admissible as evidence. (NOTE: This is King_Lear's post WhisperToMe 20:43, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC))
- This is not a court of law. There are no standards of evidence. The arbitration committee can decide to reject this as hearsay if they like, or they can not. Snowspinner 14:53, Jul 7, 2004 (UTC)
- Snowspinner is correct. Obviously I'm slightly wary around hearsay evidence, but #wikipedia is heavily logged, and I'm sure someone will be able to prove Snowspinnders' comments inaccurate or out-of-context if they are so. Martin 17:17, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Lir: RickK is a sockpuppet
- Lir: and Snowspinner is a lap dog
- Lir: *arfarf*
- Lir: ill fight rick if i ever meet him in real life
It is likely that these statements have been taken out of context.
King Lear 11:38, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Plenty of people log IRC. I invite any of them to look at those statements and tell the arbitration committee if I took them out of context, providing the missing context as needed. Snowspinner 14:53, Jul 7, 2004 (UTC)
- See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&target=King_Lear - This guy's only posts are in this talk page. WhisperToMe 20:34, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)