Kirito Like I said in that conversation, I think these discussions should happen here instead of there, because otherwise I have to relay information, making judgement calls (which I don't want to do!) on what should be private and what shouldn't, etc.
I personally disagree with this action. Refusing to participate and explain, for yourselves, here means GFL is placing me in a position where I have to defend actions I disagree with, or else they seem like my own actions, in other spaces. I don't like doing that. That, in essence, is the purpose of the forum.
So but yea. I didn't address that counterpoint there, but I'll do it here. There were six minutes, on 3/30, between the addition of the first staff note and the expunge. Do you seriously claim that during those six minutes, you noticed that Anubhav did that, convinced him that he shouldn't have done it, and then he logged on and expunged the account, with the expungement intended solely in order to get rid of the Staff note, expecting FWA to re-ban him?
I don't believe you, as I still think the timing is really implausible. Plus, after FWA re-banned him, Anubhav added a second Staff note - did he change his mind a second time on 4/2? But, eh, this is reasonable doubt I think, even though I still think the explanation that the Staff note + expunge is to bypass the warning system. Plus, since the changes I made to actually enforce this rule instead of just display an unreliable warning should make this kind of thing impossible from now on, whatever, I'm fine with closing this issue here.
Reply to the above if you want, or if not, whatever. If not, the consensus decision here will be that Anubhav didn't conclusively do anything wrong, we'll re-expunge the note, and allow FWA to ban the account again if it wants to.
