Quote:
Originally Posted by Annette
This is exactly the problem, Baalz. Sombre was granted extra leeway because of his history here. His ban didn't come out of the blue, and I'm sure he would agree. I'm certain he knew it was coming. Because we were lenient with him, there is not a record for you all to see. It's a Catch 22...I'm hearing we should be willing to bend the rules because of his contributions, but I've created an uproar because I allowed the rules to be bent.
|
This is entirely believable, and I have no reason to doubt it. I think the big issue here would be: Was sombre aware that he was near a permanent ban because of a history of infractions, even if he wasn't penalized for them? I mean, the stated forum 'justice' system serves two purposes - to punish misdeeds and to warn abusers that they are getting closer to more serious consequences. Permanent ban without appropriate forewarning would be a little harsh.
I am only aware of the recent PM exchange Sombre was involved with, so I don't know anything about a history of mod-Sombre interactions.
Quote:
|
I'm not sure what lesson we'll take from this. Will we bend the rules again for someone who has contributed greatly over a long period of time? Probably. Will that person then ignore our requests to play nice with others? Hopefully not.
|
If some members of the community are being treated specially, they should still be duly warned even if they don't actually receive the penalties. Knowing how close more severe penalties are is a disincentive to committing additional violations. (And if they don't care, then they shouldn't care when the banhammer does come down).
Possibly also keep a 'shadow-record' so you have something to show for it.
Edit: Finally, I don't think showing disrespect for the rules in private PMs should be construed as a violation of the ToS or reasons for disciplinary action since (1) it isn't a violation of the posted ToS and (2) saying something and doing something are two very different beasts.