[Rookierookie]

As far as I could see, nobody has provided any information on what the violations were, exactly. Maybe they were deleted, maybe they were through private communication. I have not said that I think he should or should not be permanently banned. At this point I have no idea what Sombre's violations were, and I would certainly like to know more.

However, a large number of posters above seem to be assuming, with no justification as far as I could see, that the violations in question were petty. Maybe it's true, but so far nobody who has posted has given any factual proof that the violations were, in fact, insignificant, and it doesn't seem like anybody has actually went and tried to find where Sombre violated the forum rules (according to admins) or hurt the feelings of a mod (according to some posters above). If you don't want to post it in a thread for whatever reason, there is always PM. What I've seen so far is, to put it bluntly, closer to figments of imagination than to fact.

I already said that arguing about the scale of the offense vs punishment is fair game. As far as I can see, the matter is simple.

If Sombre's offenses were minor, he should not have been permanently banned.
If Sombre's offenses were major, he should be permanently banned.

Either way, the amount of contribution he has made to the community is completely irrelevant. To use this rheotoric as argument makes it sound like it would be acceptable for Sombre to engage in cannabalism of infants, because he has made sufficient contributions to deserve that right.