Good job, Victor.
The process wasnât followed but Sabo is BAD so who cares?
Your posts donât support your assertion about late votes or gimmicks. âLook at thisâ isnât an argument.
This has never been required for a permaban.
at least one gimmick voted
Counterspell doesnât look like a gimmick at all? The account posted in a variety of threads in an on-topic fashion over a pretty decent length of time. That heâs no longer posting doesnât mean heâs a gimmick.
Willreads is obviously @Will1530, a member in good standing who didnât otherwise vote in the poll.
1 Like
Excuse me for asking the obvious : Does Sabo want to be unbanned?
Sabo, if you are out there, email unbindsabosshackles @ gmail.com
This is a real email address. (Freesabo was taken)
Thanks for your consideration.
Which did nothing untoward. Itâs not a banned poster. Itâs not a duplicate vote. Itâs not hiding who owns the account. There is no reason why such an account should be ineligible.
1 Like
That being the case, why is anyone even still pretending at RFCs here?
Seems this always comes down to:
A: Sabo was banned using the forumâs accepted process.
B: That process wasnât followed.
Some members of A: Yes it was liar (even though it clearly wasnât).
Other members of A: Doesnât matter.
Seems like bad faith imo.
Do the results of the poll even matter at this point? For instance, we now sort of created a 60% threshold for permaâs that is a weird interpretation of another rule. Thus, if somehow Victor were to show that less than 60% of legitimate voters supported the the ban, would that change anyoneâs opinion?
My sense is everyone just like arguing about it at this point.
You can uncover the mystery by looking at @Willreadsâs one post.
There have been multiple permanent bans before and after this one that didnât go through an RFC, and there is no established rule that doing so is required.
1 Like
So I ask again:
That being the case, why is anyone even still pretending at RFCs here?
Like mods do whatever you want. And folks like CN should stop lying about why and how Sabo was banned.
We tried to establish rules (NBZ started a thread on it), but never reached a resolution. For the most part the mods have been just making it up as they go.
I dreamed up the RFC process to be a way that we could collectively and openly make and change rules, and a decent quorum of the community bought in. Up to this point, no one has made or changed any rules about a process for permanent bans. Moderators from the very beginning of this forum have been empowered to permanently ban people. Mod actions have sometimes been met with a community referendum and overturned.
Those things are all certain. The Keeed post on Saboâs ban to me looks like a community referendum that ended up endorsing the mod action of the permaban.
Lol. Iâm the most popular poster in your head and nowhere else.
2 Likes
I donât think youâll like establishing the precedent that mods can just go against a community vote if they want to change their minds but the community doesnât.
Except that full RFC process you dreamed up was explicitly not followed for upholding Saboâs ban, but here you are again pretending it somehow was.
If the RFC process was not required, and not followed in full, why are you still referencing it when it comes to Saboâs ban.
This is all obfuscation. Again.
1 Like
No, I fully acknowledge that Sabo wasnât banned by RFC. I donât think he has to be, based on the current rules. I keep talking about RFCs because Saboâs allies keep yammering about how an RFC wasnât followed, as if that is a thing that matters despite there not being any rule that it has to be.
I told you. Mods are empowered to make permanent bans, and mod actions have been subject to community referendum.
So back to my original point, why are we even pretending RFC process matters when it doesnât. And why is it constantly brought up to justify upholding Saboâs ban when it wasnt used .
2 Likes
The captains have filibustered any attempt to make rules about permabans via the RFC process, since it takes 60 percent to do anything, so unfortunately, there are none. Moderators have mod powers. Modâs have the ability to permaban someone. Since there is no actual rule about it, seems like that ability also means they can.