It is discernment. Trolling handshakes for the sake of disruption vs established users breaking rules are different scenarios and therefore differently enforced.
You're avoiding the question on purpose because in any other scenario, it's not you who will decide if your actions were justified. You can repeat that all you want, but in the face of a jury, you're not looking like you're making good decisions. You look like you're discriminating.
You're talking to him. Let's have a mock trial, shall we? You're purporting to be transparent, right? Then you should have no trouble justifying your actions.
10 hours ago Thisisnotanexit removed comment by PearlHarborKamikaze - Bye bye natalists!
10 hours ago Thisisnotanexit banned user PearlHarborKamikaze - 14 days with reason: Trolling handshake. Everyone is free to look up trolling/trawling
In what way can this comment be construed as trolling? Sarcastic maybe, but there's no rule that justifies removal, let alone a two week ban.
Why was DresdenFirebomber only banned for two days, despite blatant and provably intentional rule infractions that violate not only this sub's rules, but the ToS?
Apparently you don't understand the duck test. On the internet, if it quacks like a duck it can be treated like a duck. If a handshake evinces knowledge of community tropes in username and first comment, it's clear it's somebody regular who is abusing an alt. If not actually an alt, he could complain via modmail and be apprised of the situation and perhaps even be given a provisional credit of some kind. But judgment about platform manipulation does take situational factors into account. The fact of several repetitions of the same behavior kinda confirms the first judgment.
Y'know, maybe I shouldn't feed a disruptor, but I wrote it so there it is.
It is discernment. Trolling handshakes for the sake of disruption vs established users breaking rules are different scenarios and therefore differently enforced.
You're avoiding the question on purpose because in any other scenario, it's not you who will decide if your actions were justified. You can repeat that all you want, but in the face of a jury, you're not looking like you're making good decisions. You look like you're discriminating.
Here, you can use this:
https://files.catbox.moe/e458q4.jpg
Make sure it's in a community I can communicate in.
Oh! The irony! LOL
Awaiting answers.
Then where is the jury of my peers?
You're talking to him. Let's have a mock trial, shall we? You're purporting to be transparent, right? Then you should have no trouble justifying your actions.
In what way can this comment be construed as trolling? Sarcastic maybe, but there's no rule that justifies removal, let alone a two week ban.
Why was DresdenFirebomber only banned for two days, despite blatant and provably intentional rule infractions that violate not only this sub's rules, but the ToS?
You've both violated site ToS.
Constantly creating new usernames just to pester moderation and you could stop insulting my intelligence but ya know, free will.
Dresden is on his first double for lashing out and breaking the rules, I would prefer you didn't do the same but ya know, free will.
Apparently you don't understand the duck test. On the internet, if it quacks like a duck it can be treated like a duck. If a handshake evinces knowledge of community tropes in username and first comment, it's clear it's somebody regular who is abusing an alt. If not actually an alt, he could complain via modmail and be apprised of the situation and perhaps even be given a provisional credit of some kind. But judgment about platform manipulation does take situational factors into account. The fact of several repetitions of the same behavior kinda confirms the first judgment.
Y'know, maybe I shouldn't feed a disruptor, but I wrote it so there it is.