User talk:Balloonman/fae

Dubious but valid RfA
When looking back on Fae's RfA, I was the loudest voice challenging it. Too much weight was put on John's role as an Arb, and while John has tried to back down from his defense, if it wasn't for his being perceived as speaking as an Arb, Fae's RfA probably would have failed. IMHO, Fae should have never been promoted. That being said, the 'crats did what they had to, the community clearly felt they had enough information to promote (including some of those who are chiming in now.) Fae was open about having a past, but the community decided at the RfA that it didn't need to know it. Fae's RfA was to borrow a phrase from the Catholic Church, valid if illicit. In other words, he was duly promoted despite not sharing his past and the community did so knowing that he had one. Thus revelations about his past do not invalidate the RfA. (Similar to the way future revalations would not invalidate a valid election or jury result.) The community knew he had a past, but chose to promote anyways. Doing so now would be Double Jeaopardy.

That being said, his actions since then are a different story. When I saw this case, I thought for sure it would have been brought by the same

The RFC/U was particularly nasty
A review of the page and talk page will show several people who got side tracted and make very inflamatory comments about Fae and others. In all honesty, it was a little hard not to have some sympathy for Fae as it was fairly clear that there are/were forces out to get him. That the issues leading to his RFC/U Ash case were still alive. Fae's behavior during the RfCU was non-existent. On the one hand, I can accept that as he saw the RfC/U as harrassment. On the other hand, we expect Admins to respond to the community. Now if that were an isolated event, I could understand it---since then, however, I've seen disturbing lack of responses or kurt responses in how he behaves to dispute resolution. The fact that this ArbCOM case was opened does not come as a surprise to me.

From an unexpected corner
When I saw this ArbCOM case, I figured it had to be the usual suspects (namely the crew alleged to be here from Wikipedia Review.) Seeing who brought the case, however, is a shocker. I've known MBisnaz on WP for 5 or 6 years and he doesn't rush to judgment like this. He is not a scandal monger, thus seeing that he (as compare to whom I expected) lends this issue a lot of credence in my book.