drafterman

• I don't like AROSE' metagaming. Out of Game Influence should be a mod-killable offense. People have thought of this from time to time, even I've thought of it and, as town, considered doing something like this. I mean, a townie wants a sure-fire way to prove themselves as town. But it's just shy of cheating and shouldn't be allowed.
  
• People who aren't familiar with the MCU (coughSupacoughMharmancough) should really look at the MCU wiki before casting votes
  

Aw, get better soon Mike.

Deleting content that violates the CoC was bish's original policy, I believe. Then there was some heated member protest about that policy. And deleting offending posts means the public can't tell why someone was banned, which can make it look like members are just being silently assassinated without provocation. 

But yeah, it probably deserves its own thread. 

It would be good if posts could be red flagged by mods to show the post was found to be in violation of the CoC. As of now there's just a green check mark either way, and people associate green check marks with approval. Red flagged posts could also be a continuous demonstration to other users of the kind of behavior that should be avoided.

But you've had multiple complaints I've found worthy of consideration, like the case you made for anonymous reporting,

or vulnerabilities in vote reporting policy.

But you do have good complaints and less good complaints, and I think this is a less good one. 

Really though, I can't believe you guys are complaining about a mod locking a questions thread. This is seriously the quality of protest you think is worth your time now? It's pretty trivial. If you make threads over things like this it can begin to degrade your credibility as sources of quality criticism, and make you look like you'll just attack any little petty thing out of spite. 

There is relatively little difference. Calling me a liar, for example attacks me as a person, but also undermines my credibility as a mod. Ethang's thread was also critical of my modding and my being a moderator, and many of those criticisms were rooted in criticisms of me as a person.

Drafter, your absurd semantic griping notwithstanding, the thread was always about moderation.

The thread was created in response to accusations that Mike and I were dishonest and acting inappropriately, going to my credibility and integrity as a mod.

The concerns raised by the thread was serious, if specious, and the AMA was a space were those concerns could be disambiguated and address. Pretty much everyone interpreted and used the thread in that way, making it impossible to believe that you could interpret it any other way.

Clearly the thread was related to moderation credibility and integrity (not moderation policy).

I was refusing to answer questions of moderation policy, not questions about moderator integrity, credibility, etc.

The thread was clearly moderation-related.

You really should stop throwing hissy fits over nothing. 

I think you need to calm down, back off,

and let me do my job.

You have nothing constructive to say and nothing productive to add. You gripe just to gripe.

Moderation could be flawless, yet you'd throw a shitstorm. You are the self-admitted Grinch of the site, taking cheap shots just to take cheap shots. I am not resigning, and, as far as I am concerned, that's the bottom line.

Either have something constructive to say within the existing framework, or consider taking a cue from Bjork.

Moderation that does not instantly ban, or delete, or block, someone or something when offended and lets things happen until it escolates to much