Part of the problem is butthurt complainers asking mods to punish someone for getting the best of them. As a result, however, some mods are entering into discussion threads and throwing 'weight' around. Their opinions now become something if you oppose, you're taking a chance of being banned. But opinions they are. A lie accused me of insulting when in fact I was the one insulted. I provided sauce/proof of a point and was told "I couldn't get through the introduction" and was banned. After responding to the ban as the notice suggested, I stated my case and suggested it was personal butthurt issue and nothing more and to prove me wrong. So more days were added in spite. The point was left unaddressed. Hate to Burst somebody's Bubble, but that's worse than Reddit, at least they didn't get involved as if to set people up for bans. Worse still, a hall monitors' job isn't to gain information.....it's to report people. I've found that when an enforcer gets bored, they'll make up offenses to stay relevant. So why would a mod want to set up an algorhythmic searchable database of anons comments if not as a form of 'keeping tabs'? Just remember that enlightenment isn't done by committee, nor allowed by crybaby tattling and gatekeepers.