Fluiddruid, why would you do this?

[Little_Nemo]

@fluiddruid

In the end, the general sentiment was that it was not a good idea and to remove the thread. That’s fine - in my opinion it’s generally easier to err on the side of caution when removing content without consensus anyway, so I tend to give a person (or thread, or post) the benefit of the doubt. In hindsight, probably too much benefit in this case, but thought I’d explain what I was thinking at the time, since you asked.

For what it’s worth, I agree with your decision. I prefer seeing a moderator pause and consider what should be done rather than make a snap judgment.

[Oakminster]

I disagree in this instance. In my view, it was so completely over the top that it seemed an obvious insta-bannable offense. At the very least, it deserved a stern warning on the spot, and I see no reason to spin it out into a separate thread.

That said, no harm was done…other than Fluiddruid missing out on the points for troll-squashing, reducing her chance of winning the Golden Jackboot at the annual Mod Award Dinner.

[Little_Nemo]

@Oakminster

I disagree in this instance. In my view, it was so completely over the top that it seemed an obvious insta-bannable offense. At the very least, it deserved a stern warning on the spot, and I see no reason to spin it out into a separate thread.

That said, no harm was done…other than Fluiddruid missing out on the points for troll-squashing, reducing her chance of winning the Golden Jackboot at the annual Mod Award Dinner.

It’s the Dread Pirate Roberts principle. You can always kill them tomorrow.