This might read as being facetious but I don't intend it to be.
I've just come off the back of a week-long (approximately) ban for referring to a poster as "fucking idiot" for suggesting that we won't win anything until we get another manager. I'm sure most would agree that the poster's sentiment was idiotic - if I'd simply said, "you're an idiot" to the poster do you think I'd have been banned?
It was the first time I'd received anything close to a warning and my intention was to call out some of those whose hysterical reactions to any loss perpetuates the feeling of negativity around the club whenever we're not on an 18 game unbeaten streak. I know it's insulting a fellow poster but I've seen far more extreme insults that were far less warranted go completely unpunished. It seemed a very harsh response.
Not being the one what done it, but I've seen plenty of occasions where people like yourself have been caught up in the whole "consistency" element of modding.
Before I was modded, I got banned for a week for insulting someone who was, after all, being a fucking idiot and the mod rightly pointed out to me that I shouldn't have been abusive (play the ball, not the man). We often are accused of not being balanced - so when 'a' insults 'b' and 'b' insults 'c', for whatever reason, then 'a' and 'b' get sanctioned, as would 'c' is 'c' retaliated in kind. Any other approach sees us accused of favouritism and/or inconsistency.
Hope that helps and welcome back.
