We don't agree they're terrible. They can be improved upon and I can see why you'd say that but agree to disagree.


You're kidding? There have been problems and drama since the site began. Again I have to disagree. That is when your personal stake started but the site has always had a very vocal minority accounting for most the mod actions. Agree to disagree again.

I know that fact triggers some people (we're people with lives and loved ones and we are not always on duty) but it's a fact not a shield. Nor are we robots. "The job properly" is subjective. I honestly got more support than complaints these last two weeks. You probably disagree, so, agree to disagree. 

The rules we'll look at. We will have that conversation. But people do waste our time by litigating even minor issues. It's a real thing and a massive energy/time drain. But yes we will genuinely have that conversation; most likely after we name the new site mod.

That entire last paragraph: agree to disagree, again. 

If you want to try to find more common ground and see what can be done going forward... I'm around. I've made that offer before and it's never been taken up. But it's there.