"::::Thanks for the reply, Risker. I'm not persuaded by it. I'm sure you aware that there is a significant difference between ""would never have"", ""did not"" and ""does not"". And, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that no page anywhere on the project uses green dye. I find it impossible to believe that our wikiworld-weary arbs are so credulous as to see no link between green and Green.

In this case Bishonen wanted Nina Green banned, and she was banned. That was not sufficient. With the decision signed, sealed,  and all but delivered, Bishonen pointed out that you had somehow neglected to include her proposal. Were you not aware of that? Had you not read the workshop and evidence pages? Had you not discussed which proposals to include? I thought that was the whole point of what you do. The ensuing unprecedented scramble to include Bishonen's proposal baffled edt sum the clerk and led to the present unfortunate epilogue.

At the beginning of this case the arbitration committee let it be known that the case was about Nina Green, despite LHvU's opening statement. In the middle of the case the secondary drafting arbitrator was happy to keep up the banter on Bishonen's talk page, but he and 15 other active arbs somehow failed to respond to Nina Green's direct question to the committee on the workshop page ""Is there any case against me which I have to meet?...What do the arbitrators feel they need to hear from me?"" I'm sure Nina's faith in the impartiality of these proceedings must have been as high as mine. At the end of this case the committee has developed collective colour blindness. 

You've asked me to drop this, and I will. I can see that it is going nowhere.   

"