hi Mana

Hey pixel.

Well, first off, I'm sorry again. I should have suspended you both at the same time, it was unfair of me to suspend just you.

I have removed the post - I was hovering over inviting Gnomeslice to a room to attempt apologies but figured it would be misinterpreted as trying to pour more fuel on the fire.

I suspended Gnome to make things right, but it was ugly because I did it way too late.

The question became irrelevant once things were dealt with

I agree with your assessment that I screwed up as a moderator horribly here.

I'll try to not fail under pressure the next time a similar situation comes up. That being said, I promised that the last time I screwed up under pressure, and clearly I haven't gotten much better at it.

Mistakes happen, my temperament was misinterpreted as me foaming at the mouth in rage where in fact I was rolling my eyes over another instance of random application of the rules

I'm not holding you personally responsible, don't dislike you, don't even dislike gnome

And it was quite obvious under the circumstances that you had just missed the conversation, appeared when something got flagged, acted on that flag

The point of the question was to highlight the fact that the lead up to the comments made (which I don't dispute as grounds for suspending me, as I also said in my question on meta)

I see.

Well, thanks for being understanding. It makes my evening a lot easier.

I am a very understanding person once things are made clear to me, I haven't been here that long, I still don't know the nuances of how things work

Our rules in chat should probably be ironed out, I guess? I mean, it kinda mirrors the situation on the main site, where our faq rules can be applied somewhat arbitrarily sometimes, although a bit more extreme since the chat isn't as heavily/commonly regulated.

Does actioning a chat flag result in an automatic ban or?

Yes, if I approve a flag it suspends for 30 minutes.

Then it wasn't even your fault, you just actioned what was available to action

And if you got a similar message to the one I got when suspended, you took the right action given the information available to you at the time

Thanks, that means a lot to me.

You mentioned that it's in your personality type to not back down from arguments, and that worries me, though.

It's fine, a large portion of my problem is here is a combination of me not being understood and me not understanding

There is a way to make me back down from an argument - I only argue when I believe I'm right, I'm not closed minded enough to maintain belief in light of something that obviously contradicts what I'm arguing for

A lot of the conversations I have that are viewed as 'heated debates/arguments/discussions' I have mentioned something along the lines of asking for clarification

I am not infallible

Just like every other human on the planet

It's not so much that worries me, it's just that the combination of you and Gnomeslice in a chatroom seems really...well, volatile.

but in the instance of tonight, I see no justifiable reasoning in me having to stop when somebody is still having a go at me and nothing is stopping them

I mean, it's just kinda difficult. You need to really pull the trigger at the first "go" at someone to prevent things from escalating, but that can also make you overzealous and start suspending people over silly things

Oh yeah I can see how it could be a nightmare to moderator

both you and Gnomeslice have the exact same attitude towards this too, and when that's the case there's literally nothing preventing this from happening again.

so I mean, the only justifiable reasoning I can think of I guess is that both of you will end up getting suspended if one of you doesn't stop.

and if we're both suspended, it's because neither of us stopped

if just one of us gets suspended, it means the other one was told their behavior was ok

Yeah, I agree with you, I screwed up there.

We've already been over that, with the information the system provides you it would have meant reading through an hour or so of text to work out both sides of the story

and with absolutely no reference point, that's probably too much to ask

my meta question was raised specifically to query exactly this

we've established you didn't screw up

and if it happens again, my next meta question will not be so provocative, since I now have an understanding of how the system works

Okay. Thanks.

The system is really confusing, though, and that's what's irritating. It leads to lots of things like this.

It would be borderline impossible for a system that establishes if people should be banned to work out the idealistic view of what information needs to be present to make an informed judgement

besides, I got a peer pressure badge out of it

heh

see, I even apologised!

@pixel thank you. :)