Out of pure curiosity, I was wondering if a Moderator Warning was ever reversed on the basis of the kind of appeals I see posted here. I haven’t seen any that have been reversed or, for that matter, worthy of being reversed. Most seem to be a desperate effort at rationalizing statements that were very ill-advised.
Much like traffic court, you could charge a fee for taking up the court’s time with frivolous appeals. Maybe ten to twenty dollars? 
It happens. Not often, but I’ve seen it.
Sometimes they are. Usually not.
In any event, threads about warnings sometimes help make it clearer to other posters just what is and is not acceptable.
I had one reversed, but not because of a thread questioning it. I simply apologized.
According to Jonathan Chance, at least one poster (Shodan) got 3 warnings reversed. That’s astounding to me. One warning reversed is rare, but three. Wow. That seems pretty miraculous to me.
The idea behind moderation is that our notes and warnings are meant to guide you to better behavior. It’s a better community for everyone that way.
It should also be mentioned that most people go through life here accruing no warnings at all and there’s no doubt a sizable number of posters who make one mistake and that’s it. They take the greater lesson from what happened and they change their behavior and life goes on and that’s the end of it.
Moderators are all too human and not infallible; we have all made mistakes. We admit it when we do and we make amends. And like posters we learn the greater lesson and we move on.
Even if we have to warn you for something, please put it in perspective: We can’t kill you and we can’t eat you. So relax. 
Jenny
your humble TubaDiva
Administrator
Your chocolate, OTOH… 
I continue to be amazed at the number of posters that go to great lengths to appeal their warnings, like they are on your permanent record or something. Is it the mentality of: (well I’m sure that I will cross the line again in the future, so I don’t want this infraction on my record as the accumulation may result in my banning)?
My perspective is, as TubaDiva points out, we are all citizens of this community we have decided to join. We can’t have anarchy, so we need rules and we need volunteers to help enforce those rules. No one is perfect, and as long as we individually strive to participate in this community in good faith, then you will be given some latitude to make mistakes. But if you continue to behave in a manner contrary to established agreement we have all made, then you essentially are self selecting to be out.
I’ve had three warnings in my time here, two of them were reversed. One of them was when I responded to someone calling libruls intolerant and wrote:
A moderator responded:
Ironically, that editing of my quote by a mod probably wouldn’t pass muster today. Anyway, after the requisite ATMB thread, the moderator reversed the warning.
Later, I got warned for editing a quote, despite the fact that my editing removed nothing and added in brackets the antecedent to a pronoun and was immediately followed with “[clarification added].” Again, a thread appeared in ATMB, and the poster whom I quoted agreed that my clarification was accurate and appropriate, and the warning was reversed.
These warnings have led me to two conclusions:
I got mine for apologizing!
CMC fnord!
From what I’ve seen, warnings are frequently reversed if there’s an overwhelming (if not unanimous) consensus of the posters in the ATMB thread that it was undeserved. If there’s a solid minority - let alone a majority - of posters supporting it, there’s (virtually?) no chance it will be reversed.
There was a solid number of people who supported my warning. It was reversed anyway.
Wasn’t one of them for insulting Forrest Gump? I’m glad that someone hates that character and awful movie more than I do!
Do you have cites for this, or is this just another way of complaining about the supposed mob rule on the Dope?
That’s usually the best approach. I can’t speak for other mods, but if someone apologizes and I think they are unlikely to offend again I may reverse it. On the other hand, opening a protest with “This warning is bullshit!” is as unlikely to be successful as it as that approach is in traffic court.
I once got a warning reversed, for a warning given to another poster.
Engineer comp geek: Please reconsider your warning in the WWI thread
We don’t make decisions based on mob rule, either to reverse warnings or to ban people. While we take input into consideration, the decision to reverse a warning is based the consensus of the staff, not posters.
I have personally reversed a few warnings that were objected to in ATMB. But that was because of input from other mods, not directly because of the thread.
Sometimes it seems to me that someone protesting a warning is mostly playing to the crowd. They hope to start a public outcry that will get their warning reversed. But this is not an effective strategy.
I’m wondering if what F-P is observing is that the weakest warnings are likeliest to have the strongest consensus against them, whereas more justifiable warnings won’t have such a consensus against them. His if-then relationship is backwards, and instead should read:
Right.
The question, though, is whether the consensus of the staff is itself influenced by the aggregate consensus of the posters.
That’s undoubtedly a part of it. But it would go against human nature to assume that public opinion has no role at all.
Oh, come on, no link?! Unrequited curiosity is even worse than unrequited love! :smack: