File: 1562000509053.jpg (101.52 KB, 582x246, 97:41, frown.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
When I voiced concerns about the new rules concerning /canterlot/ and the streamlining of the moderation process, I was told that attempts would be made by the modstaff to not let the mods !!Scootaloo and (the collection of identities who operate under the name of) !!Luna make decisions about or take disciplinary actions against me alone to avoid potential bias. I have off-site history with these individuals, and while I don't feel it's necessary to go into the details of that history here, I will if asked to. To keep it short, they have both said and/or done some pretty horrendous things to me in the past. I feel my fear of potential bias is warranted because of those past actions.
However, in >>>/pony/960354, >>>/pony/960370 it appears that !!Luna made a decision and acted alone in issuing a judgement and punishment for a perceived violation of the rules. I would like to formally request that another member of the mod staff overlook this issued punishment and also formally request the same be done to ALL future punishments coming from these individuals I mentioned above. Preferable BEFORE the punishment has already been issued and served. I think this is important to ensure there is no personal bias in these decisions.
As a side note: While I cannot change the punishment that was issued now, as it has already been served in full, I would like to contest the motivations for the decision that was made, since I was not offered the chance to appeal and this event might have an effect on any further escalation of punishments.
>>>/pony/960370 claims that I "attacking" and "disrespecting" other people. The ban message contained more, and included a list of rules I had purportedly broken, but that has since expired. I do not agree with the assessment that I violated those rules. The three individuals who posted in >>>/pony/960156, >>>/pony/960158 and >>>/pony/960211 (if they are in fact three separate individuals) have a known, consistent history of behavior that skirts the lines of violating the site's rules against trolling and "shitposting", and if they are not actually three separate individuals our rules against sock-puppeting. It is a fair thing to wonder about and question the nature of this person(s) who acts in such a bizarre manner for seemingly no reason, especially when invited to question it as I was in >>>/pony/960358. My questions in >>>/pony/960360 were not accusations, but merely questions as to the nature of this person(s). Questions on the nature of a person or persons should not be considered "attacks", just as it's not an "attack" for someone to ask me if I'm Irish. (I am not Irish.)
Alright, so I'm not gonna lie, we all forgot about the thing with those two mods. We will try to be more vigilant on that in the future.
But despite your justifications for doing so, and even despite the poster possibly being okay with it, harsh sounding questioning like that isn't allowed in the site. It can put off other posters, making them wonder how they'd be judged, even if they aren't part of the conversation. The same reason we've never allowed slurs, even between people using them amongst themselves as friends. A third party won't necessarily know the context, and a new poster might be frightened away by our exclusion of their identity as someone who's mentally ill. "Insane" "nutsos" who "just talk to themselves" are welcome on the site.
And I know I've warned you before on this, too, maybe with less detail, but it's not the first time you've said these sorts of things to that particular poster(s?). I get how weird tulpas can be, and if it were to come up in conversation I would definitely suggest people not mess around with creating tulpas, but posters who have created tulpas and also the tulpas themselves are still considered ordinary users of the site and are protected by all the same rules.