moving other's comments done posting in the middle of people's comments as user historicwarrior did is certainly undesirable and something to be avoided wherever possible quoting emails increasingly some parties are quoting emails from the leaked archive ex i thought that this was not to be done no quoting of any email is to be done by persons other than the author or intended recipient s am i mistaken talk i believe the intention of the provision you have quoted is to prevent wide scale quoting of entire emails and entire email exchanges that is the assumption i will work off when taking affirmative action as opposed to reactive action such as this although i invite you to have the committee comment on my interpretation of it regardless i'll ask offliner to paraphrase what you wrote on the mailing list although having him do this could be to your disadvantage as it provides him the opportunity to represent what you said on the mailing list in whatever way and with whatever language he chooses daniel i don t mind you removing my entire section at your discretion for as long as you read it by going back to my post and relating to the particulars listed in it however there s nothing in the initial provisions of this case indicating that you re supposed to prevent only wide scale quoting of entire emails and email exchanges that is your own interpretation of the warning which needs to be confirmed by the committee meanwhile quoting of illegally accessed emails includes also explaining in ones own words what s in those emails which in a way is even worse because paraphrasing other people is obviously tainted by personal agendas cheers talk quoting out of context and possibly doctored emails is creating imho more problems than paraphrasing as it gives an air of legitimacy to this harassment campaign ps offliner is not the ony party quoting s russavia is doing that as well talk edit conflict i'm charged as the clerk of the case to interpret the directives i receive until such a time as i am explicitly overruled by the committee how i interpret those directives is how the case will be run i have interpreted the directives and disallowing the quoting of the contents of emails allowing the subjects of emails and allowing the paraphrasing of content of emails where said paraphrasing if you're concerned about mis paraphrasing the other alternative is to give permission to be quoted otherwise your emails can and will be paraphrased within reason if you believe a paraphrase is misleading you are free to address it in your own evidence section these are the rules for the case and in response to piotrus either allow yourself to be quoted explicitly or refute the paraphrasing in your evidence section or else appeal my decision to the committee by email to arbcom l lists wikimedia org i will be happy to have my interpretation which is binding on the case absent a contrary directive from th