[quote=@Inkarnate]

It’s not a negative term, just a neutral descriptor for those criticizing or opposed to actions of the staff which I have denoted as the “authority”. It’s easier to discuss things than writing some convoluted sentence, lol.

As for why critique (unconstructive or constructive) is problematic for the scope of the site, I’ve explained that above in my ‘domino effect’ point. But to sum it up, actions have reactions and despite the intent of ones critique the dialogue presents a challenging issue when its effect could be diminutive to the site’s integrity. Sowing dissent, discrediting staff, and creating a narrative that the staff have made questionable or unjustified decisions can be dangerous. See my talking point for a larger reason for my perspective as a user of the site regarding this.

[/quote]

I'd argue this is a fallacy, the slippery slope fallacy in fact. Offering actual criticism, constructive criticism like this thread will not harm the guild in any irreplaceable or major way. 

You're attempting to dissuade any dialogue about moderation policies out of a misguided belief that it will lead to community damage. 

i.e. a domino effect, which honestly...

isn't true.

Exhibit A, Grim's banned post that went wayyyy out of line and was actually somewhat malicious. Where is the downfall of the guild community after that thread? And note this was an extremely toxic post, one that actually had intent of harming the community somewhat.

Nothing... ever really happened.

Not to mention the fact that domino theory in real life doesn't really pan out that way.

i.e. the communist countries that fell never really spread communism that far. 

If anything it's fear mongering and a poor excuse to shut down actual meaningful conversation.