"

I think the possibility of a corrupt core of admins is a problem worth asking candidates on. So if anybody else posted this exact question there wouldn't be a problem with it? Particularly, I imagine, if it were a well respected admin with an impeccable record positing it?

I read each of the candidates statements, and used that to judge if this question would be useful, look at the time between asking the candidates questions. Also look at the ""ignore all evidence"" question, this occurred to me as I was going along and it must be regarded as a general behavioural question when linked to the ""5 days"" question, plus this shows it was not a ""spam"" question to all candidates, I did pay attention to their statements.

This is the question I posed to select candidates.
What general concerns do you think are raised by the 5 days of silence from the community's admins in this ANI? Are there any other general concerns which arise from the ANI?

Do these quotes;

ameliorate, add to or amplify concerns?

Do you agree with the substance of the Jehochman quotes?

If an essay WP:IGNORE ALL THE EVIDENCE were written, what concerns would be behind it, and what could be done about them?
If you can point me to another ANI where lies and deceit by two admins within an ANI were ignored by the other admins in attendance for somewhere close to 5 days, then I will ask exactly the same question of those select candidates, substituting this with that example. Would that be acceptable?

Have you seen such examples of systemic corruption before? Or is this the only one? Of course to answer that you would also have to answer; can you say in all honesty that you think Ruslik did not lie in this ANI? If you choose not to answer... is it because you believe it is the moral thing to do, or because of possible intimidation or repercussions on your good self?   "