Apologies if it's frowned upon for me to reply in here [as I'm the mod he's making the complaint about], but there's a bit of the exchange missing and only I can provide it (because it's in my personal inbox). RealGM posting function tends to choke if there are too many quotes within quotes within quotes etc, so it cuts some of the exchange out.
I'm not fully comfortable with "airing our dirty laundry" in public like this, but since it's already been done, I feel it should at least be complete. I'll fill in the missing pieces of the PM exchange, as well as comment on some other context wrt the thread in question.....
Firstly: The thread in question had been intermittently problematic in general in no small part due to the contributions of another poster [not clyde21]. It had been locked for just over 24 hours once [about a week and a half prior to this incident] with the suggestion everyone cool down. Yesterday, during an ~2-hour span there were THREE moderator posts made (two by myself, one by PaulieWal)----some of which was in the blue moderator font----indicating our impatience and suggesting again people cool it/behave/whatever. It was within 5 hours of the last of those posts that clyde21 made the post he was warned for, which was as he quoted above:
clyde21 wrote:xxxxxxx wrote:clyde21 wrote:
funny...you weren't saying this when you were puffing your chest out after Kawhi was leading the league in PER after the first 3 games
Well at least you can't get on Kawhi for load management anymore. Warriors are load managing Curry for ping pong balls this season.
If anything, Curry should of been on load management since 2016. I guess he wanted 73 wins and 2nd place instead.
clyde21 says this was a reply to an obvious bait, although when I look at the interior-most post quoted above [from clyde21]---"funny...you weren't saying this when you were puffing your chest out.....", that seems as much a bait as what came in reply, but that's just my opinion.
At any rate, I issued the warning for the mocking emojis, which was accompanied by the following message to clyde21:
Laughing emojis are not a suitable response in any circumstance (other than to an intended joke perhaps). fwiw, your permanent record is literally over-flowing with warnings for this sort of thing, and thus the moderating team may elect to take greater latitudes in responding to similar behavior in the future.
I provided at least some indication of what the warning was for and alluded to his "colorful" personal record, while
clearly stating that this record persuades us to cut him LESS slack than we might with others [who have relatively clean records].
He then sent me the first PM, which was as follows:
clyde21 wrote:what am i getting warned for exactly? can u show me the exact rule I broke?
My 1st reply in its entirety was thus:
trex_8063 wrote:Forum Rules and GuidelinesParticularly the line regarding "Constructive Criticism", as well as subsequent posts that go into more detail. A line of laughing emojis is not "constructive".
I felt the last line in particular was pretty darn self-evident, and figured that would likely be the end of it, particularly considering I included a link to the Rules/Guidelines and some vague directions of which sections to scrutinize. I'd also at this time note there's nothing above that could even remotely be interpreted as a "temper tantrum".
clyde21 sent me the following 2nd PM in reply:
clyde21 wrote:by those standards 90% of the posts here are not constructive criticism
and he can derail the thread by making it about Curry and it's all good but I respond with an emoji and I get written up
Ok
NOTE: I felt this was getting a little silly by this point, to be made to explain [presumably to an adult] why bad behavior is bad. Here was my reply in it's entirety:
trex_8063 wrote:a) You assume no action has been/is being taken against poster you refer to [or others, for that matter], that you've been "singled out". You are incorrect.
b) Does bad behavior justify bad behavior? If someone called my son a name at school and my son hauled off and hit the kid, should I tell him "well, that's OK son. You were provoked." Come on.....
You broke a forum rule (VERY clearly, not even debatable), you've no right to be surprised or indignant about there being consequences. Period. Do NOT push this line of petulance any further; this is a waste of my time and my peace of mind.
Points a + b illustrated the logical fallacy in how he was viewing this situation, and I again state that forum rules were broken, feeling [again] that should pretty well close the book on whether the warning was justified (particularly considering some of the context alluded to above).
I also think it's not until the very last line that I've allowed any impatience/irritation to show thru [fully justified at this point, imo; though still far from a "temper tantrum"].
clyde21 sends a THIRD PM as follows:
clyde21 wrote:there isn't a single rule that says I cant use an emoji as a response, you're megalomania is taking over your thinking
Good day
By this point I was feeling sort of harassed. From my point of view the warning was perfectly standard in the circumstances, and definitely compliant to forum rules/guidelines [other PC mods have reviewed and agree, fwiw]; but I've now been assailed with
three increasingly venomous PM's in relation to it (this last actually resorting to a blatant character attack).
I sent the following [3rd] reply:
trex_8063 wrote:A row of mocking/laughing emojis is obviously not constructive; and when it's clearly not posted in "good fun" or in a sense of comradery, it's fairly obvious the intent is to taunt/bait/humiliate. This is a no-brainer, so you can stop being willfully ignorant.
Further, this EXACT type of posting is covered in post #5 of the
Forum Rules thread I already referred you to.
You've crossed a line in not letting this drop and spamming me via PM with this childishness (after being warned not to do so).
^^Here I have made an increased effort to explain [again] what was inappropriate and not in compliance with rules/guidelines (because although it seemed very self-evident to me, it apparently was not to him). I further point him to
the specific post in the Forum Rules/Guidelines thread that
literally cites the EXACT type of post he'd made as an example of what is inappropriate. I mean, the example is seriously
EXACTLY the same as his post if I'm not mistaken......
and it's in the Rules/Guidelines thread (which he's been referred to twice now).
By the point of this third reply I had explained why the warning was issued [to a pretty high degree of detail by the end]
FOUR TIMES, if including the original message that came with the warning (which makes this thread seem a bit superfluous to me, fwiw).
Anyway, considering the bizarre lengths this exchange went to, including a flurry of unnecessary and obstinate PM's, and culminating with a personal attack, yes: I then issued a suspension. I'll leave it at that.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire