My actual account, eusebius12, was banned yesterday, after a campaign of zealotry by a mod or mods, who vigilantly looked for ways to penalize me for things which were not a cause for penalty for anyone else (except anyone who actually complained about the progress of the game, (King of Towers was my main focus here for the last couple of years) which has been allowed to drift by its developers). After years on this site, and years building up my KOT account, my old account was killed by the hypervigilant mod(s). I did overreact to the last suspension, which I felt totally unjustified, and the mods involved never deigned to even argue the point. Are the mods here entitled to act as 3rd rate Gods? The first 'crime' I was accused of, somehow circumventing the 'swearing filter', is something that I've seen done here and on that particular forum many many times without penalty or even deletion of comments. Does moderating attract a certain type of person, insecure with their own power levels?
In the interest of transparency, I'm going to leave this post up--even though it's a violation of our site rules. (If another mod disagrees with this, feel free to delete the post.)
The inconsistency you're charging the moderation team with here, as I understand it, is failing to ban every user who violates our rules. That's the most charitable reading I can give here. What you actually said was:
penalize me for things which were not a cause for penalty for anyone else (except anyone who actually complained about the progress of the game, (King of Towers was my main focus here for the last couple of years)
But that claim is just false. Whenever we see a rule violation, we do our best to handle it appropriately.
Your argument here seems to be akin to someone arguing with a police officer about a speeding ticket because other people are speeding and not getting tickets. In other words, you're not debating the facts on the ground--i.e. that you violated the site's rules. You're just grumpy that other people do it and get away with it. That's a petty and childish criticism that in no way suggests inconsistency on the part of the moderation team. All it indicates is a lack of omniscience, which is understandable since we're only '3rd rate gods'.
I am, however, sympathetic to the claim that different mods react differently to rules violations. But this comes down to the human part of moderating. Each situation is different and sometimes it can be very difficult to decide on whether, or for how long, to ban a user. There are a lot of factors that go into this decision, so there's no way to put together some sort of decision procedure for this. At any rate, this is not the way to go about arguing this point and it's not even clear what it is that you're after, other than merely venting/complaining about the consequences of your actions.
It can be difficult to admit when we're at fault for things that happen to us. But it's an important lesson in growing up. In this case, I'd suggest reflecting on your actions objectively and with a little more maturity.
