[quote=@Hank] This is fair. We generally operate under the assumption that people know precisely what they've done when they get banned but I can see how that isn't self-explanatory 100% of the time, and implementing your suggestion prevents people feigning ignorance even if they do understand. As for everyone else, I'll be replying to all valid points of discussion in this thread over the course of this week. I'd also like to make it clear that I definitely won't be banning anyone for speaking their mind about the administration in this thread... as long as they don't break any other site rules in doing so. Nobody is in the "firing line" for a ban here. [/quote] I know I am not a part of this and I definitely do not want to be dragged into this drama. I felt that if we’re having a discussion and as someone with no prior personal connection with these people. I also do think it’s fair for mods to consider what the person they want to ban has said. Speaking from experience I have gotten banned on another website, despite the mods clearly recognizing the situation was a misunderstanding on both parties. I simply wanted to add, speaking also from experience being the administrator of my own website, that Administration needs flexibility. Yes, we have rules. But people actions aren’t always so black and white. Sure posting a picture of a vulgar image, or purposely calling someone out I believe is something that is in direct violation of rules. Also just calling someone a potato muncher pajama bottom is also a direct violation of the rules and how to treat people. But rarely conversations are like that. It becomes problematic to simply ban one person, if they felt the other person was attacking them or misunderstood their tone. I have always believed, when training my staff, that is the moderators and administrators job to mediate and diffuse a situation. Before they get all to happy with the ban hammer. Those are some of my thoughts from administration experience and member experience.