Suddenly, everything sticks more than it used to.
I think you're making rather too much of the "70 pages" figure. Try copying the evidence page for the current Poland case into a word processor: it's about 40 pages of 12 pt, 1.5-spaced text. And that's with strict word limits and liberal use of diffs. The T&S report contains pages and pages of verbatim copies of emails and on-wiki comments. Much of it has also been mentioned in the community evidence. We've summarised the main points and really, beyond that, there aren't any major revelations. – Joe (talk) 08:59, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
The community has been told since the beginning that T&S has "70 pages of evidence".
"verbatim copies of emails and on-wiki comments" sounds like someone trying to run the score up in an appeal to authority logical fallacy.
"Look, he's got to be guilty! Looks at ALL of the evidence we've compiled! SEVENTY PAGES!" type of duplicity.
On the other hand, "The community" submitted less than a page of stale, out of scope, copy/pasta shit.
If that's functionally equivalent to the T&S "dossier", which a sitting arb is now implying, then it's pretty clear that this railroading on the part of the T&S was intentional and corrupt.
And ARBCOM is complicit for refusing to call this out.
Their silence condemns them.
There's really only one way to read this:
The Trust and Safety of the Wikimedia Foundation attempted to manufacture voluminous evidence to falsely accuse Fram of harassment and thus ban him.
They did to protect Laura Hale, a serial grifter, who is the spouse of the Chair of the Board of Directors, from necessary scrutiny after her edits for pay were found to be damaging the encyclopedia.
