For one, we have an adopted definition of trolling, dating back to a thread started by our boi @JT2:
For two, the “plain meaning of words” I was referencing was how, plainly, fidget was not making his posts in good faith based on what he said, even putting aside an ambiguous definition of trolling. His quotes plainly mean that his question asked in the covid thread was not a genuine one, and his policing of his opponents’ words, like “gaslighting,” “clique,” and his ongoing shtick about detente were all, in his own word, an “act” that he didn’t take seriously. Now, I mean, anyone could take a fair reading of his obviously-deliberately-obtuse shtick in the covid thread and see that he was deliberately being a dumbass. I played along, because it’s important to me to communicate accurate information about covid even to someone who’s deliberately being a dumbass for his own amusement, because people lurk here and I want to help them. Anyone can see that exchange was a reiteration of the classic cartoon:
Except that instead of calling him an idiot, I supplied helpful information, and instead of publicly making a scene, he took his “victory lap” to the group PM.
Even with your explanation (I had read your prior explanations, and no, they aren’t actually evidence in any real sense except if you consider unverifiable, unsworn testimony of a participant to be “evidence.” It’s not the sort of thing that an objective observer could really use to make sense of the situation unless they take your word as gospel for no good reason at all), the most charitable explanation I can come up with for why fidget made the post he did in the covid thread and then fistpumped for trolling it – granting your entire premise that it was amidst an ongoing, serious business discussion of what they wanted to consider “trolling” in their new forum – is that it was sort of a performance art, that he somehow could not think of any way to make an argument that his bad faith posts in the covid thread should (or should not, I don’t know what side he was on) fit the adopted definition of “trolling” without carrying it out himself for all PM thread participants to see. That’s cute and all. It strains credulity that he was literally unable to think of any way to put this into words in the PM conversation without putting it into practice, but it’s a cute explanation. I don’t get why I or any active participant or any lurker in the covid thread should tolerate someone deliberately making that thread worse so as to win an unrelated argument concerning totally different people. That, in my book, absolutely deserves a ban for violating our bad faith rule even trying to discern the best argument I can come up with for why he “trolled” the covid thread given your explanation for the context of the related quotes.
And of course, the performance in the covid thread and subsequent admission that got quoted from the PM thread is not the only bad faith fidget put forth. His word policing and “Gandhi” behavior he described as an “act” to deliberately rile up his opponents. Anyone could reasonably tell that this was bad faith, because no matter how peace-seeking he pretended to be, he plainly was weaponizing his act against his opponents while giving his allies free rein to commit the same transgressions he pretended to care about. Furthermore, your explanation about a serious discussion about trolling would not apply to this, or at least, even if it were part of a conversation on whether or not they’d want to allow this, it is plainly toxic to pretend to be a peace maker in deliberate service of further discord. It should absolutely not be allowed under our bad faith rule, and if this were in an effort to subject the forum to this sort of toxic performance so as to make an unrelated point to a separate audience is most unwelcome and should be banned.
Moving on,
No, an obvious and deliberate misconstruing of what I said. Almost everything I said to a micromanager was already public information, even if it could also be reasonably described as “saying bad things.” You set the bar awfully low with “saying bad things” about someone via PM, and that’s on you. I said them via PM because that is how I was asked for clarification, or perhaps because we once voted on and adopted:
In contrast to every instance of enforcement being subject to community referendum.
As for the rest, no, I’m not going to ban or out anyone who talks about moving to a new place. Anyone is free to go at any time, and anyone can start their own brand new forum at any time. If you or Keed or jal or Sabo or anyone I’ve ever banned or anyone I’ve ever liked or anyone else want to make their own new place, that’s their business, not mine. My issue is with shitting all over this one, and I have never, not once, had a conversation with anyone about making this place worse for the people who choose to be here, in stark contrast to the people who applauded or were complicit in fidget’s bullshit. It’s a claim I am unable to back up without handing over the keys to my account (obviously any PMs I post myself can be accused of being edited, groomed or selected while hiding the real salacious material), and I’m unwilling to give up the password to my account. If you think I’m lying, have me voted out as mod.