The issue is you stated what you would like to happen to you contingent on what happens to other people. This is not something under your control.
I am not disagreeing with you.
So you are voluntarily requesting to be banned?
If I wanted to be voluntarily banned then I would ask to banned voluntarily. If I wanted the people who were issuing personal attacks to banned I would like moderators to enforce those rules instead of locking the thread. Ask the question again and I am implying you don't know what I am talking about.
Given that a user is allowed to request that they be banned, what you believe does matter. If you believe you have committed a ban worthy offense and want to be banned for it, all you have to do is ask. Is this a formal request?
Still not addressed. It doesn't matter what I personally feel here. It matters what the moderators do. If I ask for a ban. I get banned because I asked for a ban not because I was the one who should've been banned issuing personal attacks.
While messaging individual users is possible now, it is still a chore, depending on how many users need to be message. Especially when you account for the inevitable bickering and back-and-forth most users will engage in.
Simple, don't bicker. Have clearly laid out messages. The user would have to apologize or accept a ban. You are trying to make things complicated when they are not.
Assuming this community will grow, it would simply be impractical, if not possible, to expect that moderators message every single user when an instance of mass, potential violations is in progress.
Give me a ballpark of people warranted a message in the thread. Lets go with 5. Send the exact same private messages but send 5 different links of what they said. Ask them to apologize or accept a ban. This would only take a couple of minutes and then you would wait for the other person to reply in with the closed question. This can be further tuned to having everyone accept a time span they are allowed not to reply. A week should be enough time.
Locking the thread is a single action. Quick, easy, and painless.
How about Speedrace requiring to need the permission of "all" moderators for this to be enacted? Seems more like a long, tedious and painful. My suggestion would take more time but you won't be locking a thread which is stifling a conversation. Assuming this community will grow, you wouldn't want them to leave because someone else did something so they should also be punished.
There is a new moderation team with a different style of moderation.
Thank you for telling me this because neither Virtuoso or the others have made it clear what the different style would pertain too apart from I think some CoC changes but not how the moderation would follow up on it.
The site itself is undergoing changes and the current policies are being looked at and reviewed. This is general, public knowledge.
you seem more annoyed about rules being followed the way they've always been followed than what is actually best for the users and the site.
I didn't follow what you said here. I am more "annoyed" about new interpretations of the rules. For example Speedrace locking a non-spam and non-moderator thread.
An apology implies fault.
It was the fault of Speedrace locking the thread. Ragnar and "all" agreeing to it not realizing they haven't done it before. Not realizing how a user would react to it. Then stating they would never do it again. I think it is reasonable for me to imply this is an apology. I can still imply who is at fault and you are not arguing against Speedrace issuing it and Ragnar and "all" agreeing to it then Virtuoso changing his mind.
You can do something that turns out to not be the correct course of action without having committed any mistakes or errors or done anything that is fault-worthy.
Don't waste my time with intent. I don't think you are as capable as bsh1 in arguing this. I know how it went down with bsh1 and this time I think it would be a poor representation of his position even if the moderation has changed I don't think what you said here was formulated better than bsh1.
I cannot attest to the inner workings of Virtuouso's mind.
I am deductively reasoning this. You are simply feigning ignorance which is obviously also my position.
Perhaps you should recommend that Mike create a medal for that?
If only I cared about medals. Sorry but you can take the typo medal if you want.
That link affirms what I was saying: It wasn't a unilateral action taken by Speedrace himself.
Who said I disagreed? Speedrace locked the thread agreed by Ragnar and "all".