Regarding the admin in question making the statement that your prior conversation with db0 “wasn’t with them” - fuck that noise. That attempt at rationalization alone is enough for me to call their action an abuse of power. I was in agreement with their thought process up until that statement, but using that as a justification reads as “I have authority and what I say goes.” More than one admin on this instance has served as an illustration of the corrupting nature of authority.

That being said, you come off as the type of person who has far too often avoided, by virtue of hiding behind a screen, being punched in the in the fucking mouth for your cowardly behavior. If you know you’re an abrasive asshole, don’t be a craven little shit on top of it. Starting static and then hiding behind a hierarchy when you get your little feelings hurt in return is some real bridge-dwelling bullshit. You deserve the action that was taken, regardless of the piss poor “clarification” given by the admin in question. If that little wrist slap, which is far less than you ask for in consideration of the way you engage with others, is enough to make you tuck your tail and scurry off to find a new viaduct to settle under, good fucking riddance.

Easiest PTB so far.

Proposing a very specific limit on posts referring mod/admin actions taken against users on LBZ that directly fall afoul of their instance rules regarding very specific gatekeeping might have some value. The subject has been hashed and re-hashed too fucking much. Their rules are their rules, breaking those rules on the instance is clear YDI. Breaking those rules elsewhere and having action taken against you is arguably PTB. I’m in favor of the idea of putting that on wax.

Purging previous discussion is no good, and even the proposal, coming from a community mod as it does, rubs me the wrong way. It shouldn’t, because you have just as much right to propose a change as any other community member, but it puts me on edge.

There is value in what’s been said already, even if some of it is highly disagreeable. Suggesting removal of that record for any reason invites future discussion of the same, IMO. Not everyone who will ever be a member of this community is a member now. If we’re going to consider making a rule about this whole mess, best to leave the roadmap that led us here intact.

Potential yes to a well-defined rule of specific, narrow scope. Hard, hard no to retroactive application of that rule.