Alright, @AlexanderGruber, @quid, @AloizioMacedo, and the mod team in general. You've conveniently destroyed evidence, or the SE team destroyed it, regarding a specific MSE user's abusive, harassing behavior both on and off site, which went so far in an attempt to undermine the moderator election, intimidate a Ph.D student to the point that he felt he had little choice but to leave. And the culprit remains at large. This is the single most egregious incident I can ever remember on this site.

Are you hoping users on this site will forget about Michael Hardy's harassment and intimidation, and inexcusable attempt to sabotage an up and coming PhD student's career, due to MH's resentment dating far too long ago to still have been caring a grudge so destructive toward another, and mind you, MH targeted me as well. Do I have no right to not fear whatever maniacal retaliation MH has designs on, against me?

Anyone interested here, on seeing the incriminating confession from Michael Hardy, two days ago, and I'll be happy to replace here, or wherever you'd prefer me too.

@AlexanderGruber If anything is currently under investigation, and the details of action are being worked out, I apologize. But I think it is important for moderators to understand the limit of what "little ole' non-mods" see. MH up and active. Evidence destroyed. Silence. If you have any memory way back when, say, six or more years ago, when you were a "simple non-mod user", please understand that those three factors add up to secrecy, hiding evidence, pretense.

Ultimately, loss of credibility, and distrust from users that anything means anything on this site.

@amWhy I did not destroy anything. I protect it. I can restore it at any moment.

Instead if I do nothing it is around, anyone can flag, not informed mods from somewhere might decide to delete one thing or another because it is "not nice" etc.

I'm sorry if I sound rather distrusting or agnostic about who's doing what in whom's best interest right now. But, then, I tend towards the "idealist", though I'm willing to acknowledge that pragmatism may ultimately serve an "ideal" outcome. Just as long as "pragmatism" doesn't justify "let's all make this go away". I can't wrap my head around any mod on this site, nor community manager, supporting that sort of pragmatism. But I see what I see, and I know what I don't see.

But I remain hopeful that I am currently just being impatient.

@amWhy of course it does. But still everybody has the right to a fair process. The actual events are by now almost two months in the past. There is also no imminent threat to prevent, thus there is no need to act in the heat of the moment.

@quid I agree, for the most part, though it was quite clear to me in the now deleted discussion, that MH has redirected his angst towards me. Perhaps it was just a means to avoid answering your questions, but knowing what I know, I really do not feel safe on meta, I feel unjustly maligned and misrepresented by MH, in the discussion, and in the continued comments from MH, in comment section of the meta post, apart from the "discussion chat." So what about my "rights"?

@amWhy if there are problems, please, flag them.

The events also of concern to me have occurred over the course of the last two days. It is clearly not an "old" matter, as anyone who read MH's comments in the now deleted chatroom. He clearly, even now, harbors great hostility towards members of the "clique" he continues to call "bullies", another violation of the CoC.

Because of one meta post of his that was correctly closed as a duplicate.

@amWhy yes. Please, flag as you see fit. Do not engage in a discussion, raise a flag.

To recap, the room is not deleted. It is just not accessible to the general public at the moment.