Quote:
Originally Posted by chillrob
He has never gone a day without deliberately breaking the rules, any of which should have been enough to ban him given his history. Why is there a need to wait for the single over the top post? IMO one 10/10 out of line post isn't nearly as bad as many 7/10 bad posts every single day.
Because of posts like this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc
It's a month because one of our moderators decided that he deserved it, even though he can't point to any specific post that Victor made. That's not something that anyone should be ok with.
I mean, of course we don't have to live in LuckboxWorld where apparently moderation action is only acceptable if there's one specific post it's based on. Just the same, taking the "lifetime achievement" approach can be contentious at times, even when it is warranted. That's the difficult thing about posters who constantly dance around the line of what is likely to get them banned, and what to do with them. But at some point, moderators decide enough is enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckbox Inc
Victor was banned multiple times during Browser's reign and you're acting like he was completely unmoderated prior to now.
Ah, a history of getting banned, you say? Hmm, I wonder if there's any possibility that could have been a factor here?
If you want to make a case that Victor's constant use of rhetoric, attacks, etc. should be tolerated, go for it. Maybe you think his positives outweigh his negatives. Or that he's no worse than others who are permitted to continue. Or that we should be fine with the worst of his rhetoric. While I may not agree, I can at least understand those arguments. But this whole 'you can't show us a post that got him banned...gotcha!' and 'a mod said he was waiting for a post to ban him for...gotcha!' nonsense is a waste of time.
And to be perfectly clear, those last two quotes aren't actual quotes, but my own summaries of sentiments I saw being expressed.