Pretty sure I’ve got a good line on Gregorio’s thoughts - even grunching.
edit: anyway, I’m super tired - was on the roof all day followed by 1.5hr in traffic, and I still have to go out and pick up microdaughter and take her to microdaughterpoetryreading - so I can’t get too serious about anything.
Where the fuck have you been all day. 
I can support your plan with the proviso that the mod automatically and immediately is de-modded and receives a lengthy temp-ban (even, shudder, a perma-ban – I am serious).
It’s not always as nice as James would have you believe.
I was gonna say that I like the Ben E King Drifters version better, but I think BenE left the group before that song came around.
This is a fair point, but it’s still quite a bit different than threatening to shoot up some place or go kill someone or whatever.
The poster does not pose a threat.
That’s a threat to themselves, which is a separate matter we may want to discuss.
Get a warrant, show us proof, show it to our lawyers, etc.
Maybe in the aftermath, but I would have some reason/logic for my decision that I could stand on. It’s a far cry from an explicit threat of lethal violence.
I basically suggested this way up thread, and I’ve been getting killed in this thread lol… Now you like it?
This is a bit much IMO. You can perma de-mod someone and have an automatic site vote on a ban, but that’s something I already suggested, too. To auto perma a mod for this without considering the facts is extreme.
Is there even a remaining disagreement? We shouldn’t have any language in a rule about voluntarily handing over info, but a mod can take it upon themselves to do so in extreme cases like a mass shooting threat. The mod should expect to be demodded and to justify themselves to the community.
All good?
Other than to say that the mod can be expected to justify themselves to the community and to be demodded if the explanation is found wanting, I agree with this.
Would it satisfy the detractors that cases of imminent and specific violence where we want to call the cops like in cuse’s examples would require affirmation from multiple mods?
Not really.
I agree with Microbet’s stance posted above. It is the policy of this forum that no mod/admin can give personal information such as IP and email address of posters to law enforcement for any reason (unless compelled to do so by a legal warrant). This leaves unstated but understood that should any mod/admin ever do so, they shall no longer remain a mod/admin.
I’m gonna get perma’d over this rule so aorn I’m just trying to come up with something memorable
If a mod broke the policy and narced I definitely don’t think they should be automatically permabanned. Any kind of Perma ban of a regular user should require considerable consideration and a vote. As far as being demodded, I don’t really care. There should be a lot of churn in mods anyway.
“narced”
Snitched?
You’re a big fan of Joe Paterno and his defense of Jerry Sandusky’s privacy, right? He was no snitch, that’s for sure.
How about some context? Are you a big fan of calling the police on NotBruceZ?
Or maybe you want to call the police on Gregorio if he organizes some protests?
Actually the appropriate response to this is just “fuck off”.
Literally no one has suggested anything like this and you know it.
That’s the context here, not raping children.
No the context here is mass shootings and suicide. Please don’t grunch these threads.
The context is where is the line and where is NotBruceZ in relation to it. You’re grunching the whole forum if you just look at this thread. And in this thread, part of the discussion is about political violence, or things likely to lead to political violence.
But regardless, no one was talking about Sandusky. That was fucked up.