While some of this is fascinating, it's all TL;DR so I'd appreciate it if MaliceAforethought or someone else could summarise each of the leaks at the bottom so we don't all have to spend ages reading. Thanks.

How about a Wikipedia stub for each one, with categories and a list? Then spam the ad/arb pages - You can help fill it in! Malleus can help with GA.

The Cliff Notes should be out in a few months, followed by a graphic novel starring the Smurfs as the committee members.

What's going to be needed for maximum utility and efficiency here is for the entire corpus to be released.

Probably that would require redaction, if we want to be collectively responsible for avoiding collateral damage.

That redaction would be a huge job.

I'm willing to volunteer, but the crucial issue here would be that Malice would trust the redactors to not publish the material except with his consent. I'm willing to promise that.

Malice can set any standards he or she chooses. If I don't agree with them, I simply won't publish. Obviously, though, if Malice sends me the complete archive, I'd get to see it.... which is the reason I'd be willing to put in the work.

Malice could -- and should -- also designate others trusted to be responsible for maintaining appropriate privacy. The more who can share this task, the easier it will be.

Malice has the archive, which is why Malice has control. But responding to piles of requests has to be a pain.

I'm beginning to hear, from insider sources, some hair-curling stuff. Things could be much worse than most of us have suspected.

Redact what?
A public dump of everything probably would not harm anybody.
Redaction would prevent researcher from pulling back the curtain on Arbcom.
As soon as its dumped people will go ZOMG for a few more weeks and it will sink back into obscurity and really only come up here on WR.

Information wants to be boring.

Bottom line, "redact what" Malice says to redact.

Redaction, per se, does not prevent legitimate research. If what I've suggested is done, any researcher may contact someone holding the archive to request further information. Malice may set standards for that.

Look, it is Malice's call. Malice could tell us all to take a flying leap.

If Malice has a private agenda, Malice could use possession of the archive to further it, we can't stop that. Malice could do all kinds of things. But if the possibility of Wikipedia reform is Malice's agenda, or at least exposing the reality of ArbComm practice, which could set the stage for reform, then Malice might consider expanding participation with this.

That's all.

I disagree that the archive would disappear into permanent obscurity if the full archive becomes available (even if redacted, as long as redaction wasn't massive and without good cause). This could be used for research into Wikipedia practices that could be much deeper than possible from hitherto-limited public information.

I'm sure that whatever you posted, taking the time to read it would have been an exercise in ignoring irony.