An issue of how rules are enforced

[Timsup2nothin]

First, this is an important quote for anyone participating in this thread to have at hand and refer to throughout:

General discussion of how and why moderators do what they do are permitted in the Site Feedback forum when the discussion is in the spirit of improving the forum. Discussing specific incidents of warnings, infractions, bans, specific posters or moderators is not allowed. A statement of a fact of a warning, infraction or ban you yourself have received without value judgements is allowed. Publicly discussing a specific instance as a "hypothetical" is not allowed.

Here is the statement of fact: I have received an infraction, as I predicted in this thread.

I have appealed the infraction on the following grounds:

I only broke the rules long after the 'rule of rules' had demonstrably broken down.

All actions deemed "appropriate" had already been taken. The troll had been reported more than 24 hours before. Reports of his additional infractions had been submitted as they happened, sufficient to generate more than enough infractions to do away with him. Other regular posters had done the same. The troll, having become dissatisfied with the level of response in that thread had begun trolling in another thread, so the "starve the troll until he goes away" plan that has site approval wasn't working.

In essence, the troll, in being allowed to continue his behavior over an extended period of time, reduced 'the rules' to such a state that they effectively could not be broken. Responsibility for this lies primarily with the troll, and secondarily with the rules themselves.

Trolls of this sort are a known and repeating problem. They "drive by" with the intent to disrupt, and until their disruption leads to a sufficient conflagration to attract some enforcement attention they just caper along. In this case that attention was drawn not by the trolling of the troll, not by reports of the trolling, and not even by the flame war when it finally erupted. Until I had the temerity to predict my own infraction in site feedback there was no enforcement of rules.

Moderator Action: Please do not engage in public discussion of specific moderator actions.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Closed for review

 

[Camikaze]

Moderator Action: This thread will stay closed. As you are aware, public discussion of moderator action is against the rules. As you have noted, we have an appeals process. In that appeals process you can put your case, and upon the conclusion of the appeal it will be published along with the moderator responses. If you are concerned with the 'rules of the rules', please let that process take its course.

You are of course welcome to create a thread to discuss why you dislike the appeals process, but please refrain from publicly discussing specific moderator actions in the process.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889