@Cat Administrator
I've recently become aware that you set Gargamel's account to discouraged status, which I, a beloved and well respected member of this community personally disagree with for a number of reasons.
1) The unwritten admin policy has always been that behaviors are banned, not people (with the exception of those that break the law or fuck with you IRL). Gargamel was genuinely trying to be helpful but became frustrated with you, which is why he lashed out. I believe this to be a reasonable response (especially since he didn't take IRL actions against you) since it can be very difficult to communicate with you.
2) Redirecting people's accounts to another site is a lame, petty and ineffectual way to handle users who've temporarily become an issue to you. All this does is amplify resentment and encourage socking when explaining why they're tripping, how they can come back to their main account and issuing a brief temporary ban would work better.
3) Gargamel is well liked by most people here. It's a fragile ecosystem you have here as the user base is small, so it's unwise to be petty towards people who are generally well received, especially when they were initially acting in good faith. I may not be a particular fan of his but I'll never be in favor of banning anyone who hasn't broken the law or taken IRL action against you. Banning people because they upset you with nothing but words is Josh tier behavior and everyone here is tired of Josh tier behavior.
4) Gargamel could still be beneficial to the community as he's computer savvy and had the drive to effort post for the wiki project. He may not longer wish to assist you in anyway but you need reasonable people with a desire to positively contribute, so letting up on him is a good idea.
I hope you take these factors into consideration, along with the communities response to the poll. Thank you for your time, patience and consideration
I've recently become aware that you set Gargamel's account to discouraged status, which I, a beloved and well respected member of this community personally disagree with for a number of reasons.
1) The unwritten admin policy has always been that behaviors are banned, not people (with the exception of those that break the law or fuck with you IRL). Gargamel was genuinely trying to be helpful but became frustrated with you, which is why he lashed out. I believe this to be a reasonable response (especially since he didn't take IRL actions against you) since it can be very difficult to communicate with you.
2) Redirecting people's accounts to another site is a lame, petty and ineffectual way to handle users who've temporarily become an issue to you. All this does is amplify resentment and encourage socking when explaining why they're tripping, how they can come back to their main account and issuing a brief temporary ban would work better.
3) Gargamel is well liked by most people here. It's a fragile ecosystem you have here as the user base is small, so it's unwise to be petty towards people who are generally well received, especially when they were initially acting in good faith. I may not be a particular fan of his but I'll never be in favor of banning anyone who hasn't broken the law or taken IRL action against you. Banning people because they upset you with nothing but words is Josh tier behavior and everyone here is tired of Josh tier behavior.
4) Gargamel could still be beneficial to the community as he's computer savvy and had the drive to effort post for the wiki project. He may not longer wish to assist you in anyway but you need reasonable people with a desire to positively contribute, so letting up on him is a good idea.
I hope you take these factors into consideration, along with the communities response to the poll. Thank you for your time, patience and consideration
