Only asking because the staff is repeatedly bringing this up without further context, were these PM's reported and sent to staff, or did staff find them during their own investigation? For two of the troublesome members to be "PM'ing themselves" seems unlikely that they would report each other. Also, was any action taken against the offending user(s)? The ban list does not mention anyone making death threats, although the "disrupting the site" reason can literally apply to anything. Furthermore, all users accounted for in the ban thread can be attributed to specific public posts. This suggests that the offending death threats are not tied to them. While I understand some moderating is done "behind the scenes", the staff itself has presented this ban thread as a way to keep everyone publicly accountable. Death threats are very serious allegations and these should be dealt with in the same strict and public manner as other lesser offenses.
In short, those people who were death threats are gone or punished. Details would be unnecessary, but threatening or exceeding in any way is something we've been guilty of leniency before. Even if half joking such stuff must not pop up again. Oh and yes, lots hours behind the scene. Mostly boring or hard to choose stuff trust me!
We don't have to reveal that we've banned someone, or why. We've had to ban people a lot... before the forums went down, after... it's not a new thing. Why does it not have to be related to one of the people mentioned? Is it beyond the realms of possibility that someone caused disruption in a thread AND sent abusive PMs? There seems to be a lot of assumptions made this year, without knowing full facts. Regardless, I can say that it was before the list was created. Clearly, Admin felt it was necessary to show people that we are actively dealing with disruptive users and making it a nice, friendly place to chat about the obscure side of gaming. Was the person banned? Of course. Is the person on the list? Could be. Looking at the relevant content, it was perhaps meant to be some tasteless joke. Threatening users is never funny, and will always be treated seriously.
My post did not claim that you have to. Nor did it claim that it must not be anyone on the list. I know that bans are not new. While I do not post very much at all, I have been here for a number of years and have seen many changes. This is the first time I've ever been uncomfortable to post my opinion on this site. I made a constructive post about things that continue to be issues. But you are correct, there is certainly no requirement to be transparent. In the end, I don't feel it was out of line to ask. Thanks for your response. Take care.
Your question is perfectly valid. I answered as best we can... pointing out that we're not going to say who did what. You never know when there could be legal implications. Death threats, for example, are illegal. Therefore, I'm afraid you're not correct in what you say - we cannot divulge such information as it could have negative repercussions on a legal case, if there were one. Bear in mind what I said about jumping to conclusions, though. There's a lot that you won't see... either because it was deleted as being inappropriate or, as mentioned, in PMs. You did jump to the conclusion that this person couldn't possibly be one of those named as receiving a ban, because you know what they did was something public that's still visible. No such suggestion was made. It may or may not be a user on the list. I can tell you that it happened BEFORE the list was made. So did we include the person on the list, most of which were banned afterwards? Well, I'm not going to say... but maybe. Also... assuming that one single post is the cause of a user's ban is not correct. I can tell you that posts and threads have been deleted relating to one or more users, so you won't see them. And it could well have been a number of issues for a user. As for PMs, as we keep saying, staff can't see PMs unless a user reports it or adds a member of staff to the conversation. You also assume it was two of the offenders PMing each other. Maybe, maybe not. Regardless of whether you'd posted something for which you might be reprimanded, would you not report a death threat in a PM, though? Staff repeating the offence verbatim, where a post had to be removed, would be perpetuating the matter and serves no constructive purpose. Thus a generic description may be given. The user, however, knows what he or she did wrong - they'll receive a warning report.
