since my perception is that people like to harass him apparently for no legitimate reason at all

You don't end up as one of the two most talked about PTBs in this community with there being "no reason at all".

Yeah. FS really seems to take a lot of heat. I think it’s because people have come to know that he will always defend himself. And when they repeatedly antagonize him- it always seems it’s for their entertainment.

We've reached the next level peeps. Mods pre-emptively opening YPTB posts about their own actions! 😈

Don't know that I would've banned someone for a single report, even if it was nonsensical. Sometimes, people have a bad day, and aren't thinking clearly.

Generally I'm quick with the banhammer about positions (ie genocide deniers o u t), but reluctant about attitudes. As someone who is miserable and tetchy myself, I know all about what it's like to snap - even at someone I don't like - and overstep the boundaries of good taste, norms, or constructive participation in a community.

BPR, I guess? I probably would've told them to fuck off, but a ban might've been an overreaction.

At the same time, operating on your gut to keep a place clean is often necessary to maintain your sanity. There are only so many hours in the day, and only so much energy you can spend reasoning or enduring people.

I dunno, man.

One report is not report abuse. And I do often see FS arguing up and down a thread about nothing at all, so the report isn't off base either. If you think FS's behavior is inappropriate, you can remove the comments or ban him. If you think it's appropriate, then you can explain that to the user who reported it. You're not required to continue that thread, though.

If they continue reporting material that has been identified to them as non-rulebreaking, then that is report abuse and merits a ban.

So, YTPTB I guess?

I think that's ridiculous, so I talked with them about it.

Well, there's your problem. One silly report? Reject, don't think about it again unless the reporting user gets increasingly uppity all on their own. You don't have to engage with everything (and I am fully aware of the irony of my saying that).

Now, what the user said after that in your private communications may have warranted a "GTFO," but you're right to not publish that. It'll have to be your judgment call there.

I often agree with your positions on various things, Phil, at least to the extent that it seems that we're operating from a similar point of reference. That said, and in light of the nature of the private communications remaining private (as it should), there's only one conclusion that seems fitting.

PTB.

One instance of anything hardly seems like grounds for a ban. Repeat behavior certainly could justify that action, but in the absence of any pattern it seems like an overreach. There might well be further justification for a ban based on the direct messages; but, as you're submitting your own action for analysis, the only fair way to evaluate is on the grounds of what we are directly privy to. Anything else has to be viewed as simply your biased interpretation of the private conversation.

In the circumstance you describe the onus on the user is not to be "receptive or apologetic" to you in the private conversation, only to correct their usage of the report system. As presented, it reads as if they were banned because they did not show adequate respect for your authority, which is clear PTBehavior. Further, you attempt to bolster your point by painting Squid, a user who loves to try to win bad-take arguments by referring to their own mod status in other communities (essentially a PTB themselves), as undeserving of ire despite an extensive history of spinning out, losing the thread, and generally being a dick when it happens. Carrying water for someone who comes across as power-trippy does little to shift perception of your own actions away from that mark.

Someone reporting something, you disagreeing with it being a reportable offense, and the user getting banned for it... a single mistake isn't abuse. If you had explained that doing it again would lead to a ban, and then they did, sure.

There's literally no way to take this other than PTB. Unless he threatened you in the DM, you're absolutely the one wrong here.

I won't analyze this case, but: Abusing the report button is an issue. This forces you to do work to check it, clear it and so on. I can handle the reports in my communities (there are a few), but if I would be getting hundreds of reports every week, I would burn out quickly. People like to shit on mods, but most people don't know how many batshit insane people there are on the internet and that the best way to have a nice community is to keep them away.

PTB majorly. You don't want to ban people for reports unless they're spamming false reports.

Otherwise you discourage reporting. Think of it this way, would you rather have them just not report things because you ban them or threaten to ban them for things you don't think are personally actionable.

There's not an abbreviation for this in the community rules.

It isn't power tripping fully because the decision was made based on more than a single factor, and they are indeed reasonable rules.

But it is a tad much for a permaban on the first go on your instance. While I agree there are some people that do not give a fuck and stir shit everywhere they go, and I agree that it seems you were dealing with one, a temp ban is the go-to.

Since you can't/won't share private communications (and good on you for that), we can only go with what's available, and a permaban is too far based on only that for a first offense.

If their responses in private were bad enough, that's a judgement call, and it might change the matter. Since you don't have a history of wielding the hammer heavily, despite having every right to do so on own instance, I give you the benefit of the doubt as well. A single action does not a power tripper make. It's about patterns of behavior.

So, the specific action was low grade power tripping, but you aren't a power tripper.

Now regardless of that, I fully support preemptive bans as a valid tool. Someone has a history of abuse on other instances and communities, and starts the same behavior on another one, it is a valid option. It is, however not an opinion that is held by a majority, and I tend to give my opinion about that less weight here lately. I accept that a lot of people consider that a power trip most of the time. But I think preventing a pattern from forming in the first place is a good thing when done with care.

Three-day bans are like spritzing a cat in the face. It's corrective.

Permabans should be reserved for diet Nazi shit. Truly beyond-the-pale, never-gonna-get-better assholerey.

... did you permanently ban someone for asking to have rules enforced, instead of starting shit verbally? Because if so, what the fuck.

PTB

I don't get the ban over one report. Feels Gestapo.

Permaban should be reserved for bots and threat actors IMHO

In this case, you were not the target of the reports, it was the community mods I guess?

You are not the asshole. Your logic is reasonable and self consistent.

since my perception is that people like to harass him apparently for no legitimate reason at all

I still have them labeled as an abusive mod for baiting someone into a debate then banning them from the community for engaging in that debate. So I think this user does look for fights, to be fair.

I don't think I have anything to add that others haven't already said, except for

You're literally PTB - Philip The Bucket

That is all