Given that most of my mental health talk is inside of that thread, I’m fairly certain you have. It would be trivial for me to check, but I won’t do that.
I cringe at even giving your post any kind of credence, but my speaking about mental health has helped more than a few people, and they’ve said so.
I included it. You are lying again, or cannot read.
So it was all a big lie? 
Do I get a refund?
Sure. When you send me the £500 I’ll return it minus fees.
So ******** in place of the word the clique doesn’t want censored has clearly won the pole and it’s been several days. Can we update the software now? That maybe ends this thread? Instead of it just being the general airing of the grievances thread. That’s what “About Moderation” is for!
You are hardly above assigning people to groups that you hold a grudge against:
But ok, I’m down with jman’s idea, we’ll add “cl*que” to the profanity filter. (Edit, lol, misread jman’s post, but we can still do this).
I would appreciate your input on the second, more important part of that post.
Seems legit.
Yet micro has already given you a specific example of when he banned me and I accepted it with grace and without complaint. So maybe the problem isn’t me?
I will replace “clique” with “small group of posters from the UK who like to follow around other posters and mods and troll them for shits and giggles.” Now, can we please implement the results of the pole and replace the c word with ********? kthxbye.
That you have once does not address the substance of my argument, that you are the only arbiter of what is biased that you will accept, and as such, any mod has to weigh drawing your ire with any action taken against you. Mods should not have to accept your perpetual abuse whenever they take an action you do not like.
I didn’t have an issue with goofy banning me recently either. I was pissed off at Wookie’s ban because he was an active participant in the discussion on the opposing side, because it was for “bad faith” which is an ill-defined concept at best as we’ve seen recently, and because he trolled me in the thread while I was banned and unable to respond.
Lol, micro and you come down on the same side of like 95 percent of issues. He’s the one who defended your ridiculous performance in the early COVID threads and your whataboutism. It’s not shocking that you’re “ok” with him banning you.
I am strictly against personal attacks and think they should be moderated with repeat offenders getting escalating bans. I think we should differentiate between abuse and harsh criticism. Where that criticism veers into personal attack territory it should be moderated. Moderators should look at each situation holistically though.
Suzzer asked a forum full of people who mostly took this pandemic very seriously to ask if he should travel internationally for what I assume some interpreted as getting his dick wet. JohnnyTruant recently posted that his little kid hasn’t played with another kid for a year. There are others who made great sacrifices to protect themselves, their family and others. We have several frontline workers posting here about the ordeals they endured and the suffering they witnessed.
It’s beyond tone deaf to ask this group for a blessing to engage in risky behavior that perpetuates this pandemic. From his first mention of his trip I expected it to be a foregone conclusion because that’s the way these things typically go. “Thanks for the feedback. I am going to do it anyway.” If people don’t take too kindly to that the moderation should take the circumstances into account.
Cliffs: if you ask about travelling for fun during a pandemic be prepared for the backlash
I gave you an explanation for your ban in excruciating detail. It strains credulity that you still believe that you were banned for nebulous reasons.
To ask that only uninvolved mods take action is to ask for no mods, or to insist that mods must be paid. No volunteer mod wants to have it demanded of them that they go and read a backstory on some internet slapfight so that they can judge in an unbiased manner (and then still get accused of bias or lack of reading or being otherwise unsuitable by the person moderation was taken against).
lol the poll got 36 votes buried in a thread that no one in their right mind would read. The original poll got 87 votes and banning the word was roundly defeated. Probably fewer people voted to censor the word as originally voted to ban it. If you want to censor the naughty word you should start another thread with the poll in the OP.
Come on man, you know what I’m talking about. There is a difference between being involved in a discussion, and being an ardent proponent of one side or the other. In this case, you were the latter.
And yes, I still disagree with your characterisation of what I was doing as “bad faith”, even if the ban was deserved on other grounds.
In an internet slapfight, there are only interested parties. Disinterested parties moonwalked out of the thread long before moderation was needed.
When there are complaints via a number of flags about use of the c word, some of them in P by another poster and not even in this thread, and a mod charges into this thread and threatens me that if I type the c word I’ll be banned regardless of community rules…
LOL
…yeah I’ll complain about unfair modding.
You still didn’t answer the question I asked about whether you thought that was good or bad modding? Perhaps you could now?
That’s a pretty impressive tally all things considered, imo.
Now that Kushner’s gone maybe you can try your hand at peace in the Middle East.