All The Tropes Wiki Project, Part XXVI

[GethN7]

...
He's back. And the tone of his latest post is remarkably similar to Usenet posts back in the day from single-issue posters or trolls.

I suggest that those of us who have identified ourselves as mods not reply directly to that post, since doing so would provide the attention that the poster wants.

Oh, and Max Sinister has fired his latest salvo.  I am firmly convinced that the only reason he joined the wiki is to cause trouble.
...

Posts that pass in the night... I've had my say on the matter by replying to Umbrie.

Well, it's become flagrantly clear they do not wish to contribute positively unless we bend to their unreasonable demands to bluenose bowdlerise ourselves to please them. Since we do not like to ban without cause, I'm going to make one post telling them this is going nowhere, our position is clear, the discussion is OVER. Anything other than compliance will be met with a block of nothing less than a year.

That way, they can't say they were not warned.

And Bob, much obliged for the technical report.

Geth, "Disagreeing with a mod" is specifically listed as something that we do not ban people for.

We have no cause to ban this user. At all.

If you make that post, you'll be leaving yourself open to complaints that the rest of us will have to act on.

That's not what I'm doing. If they really wanted to change things, we have a process for it. They don't want to do that. They instead want to moralize, guilt trip us into seeing things their way, and change things to suit them and them alone, all because they oppose a core site policy without going through the proper procedure to change it, which is by vote and discussion.

If this were a simple disagreement of opinion, that's one thing. I'd be fine with that. This has been crossing the line into making demands, questioning our moral integrity, and generally just digging in their heels to insult people. If they wanted to remain civil and discuss this, that's one thing, I'd consider reasonable. However, all they want to do is demand we make changes and until we do, insult our sense of decency and morality because of their personal offense.

tl;dr: If they want to make the same arguments after they come back in a less disruptive manner, fine, but since they do not want to be civil, I think they need time to consider our position and how their approach is just disruptive. It is not our job, insofar as I'm aware, to entertain insults and invective from someone with a Single Issue Wonk who refuses to contribute in good faith.

So no, not a ban, more an enforced (and not permanent) cooling-off period so they might come back later in a more civil mood. Unless they proceed to get more disruptive, then we'll go from there.

That said, I admit I could be overstepping, so here is my post, where I admit I'm going to leave this up to my fellow admins to act on according to their discretion:

https://allthetropes.org/w/index.php?tit...1dn8adcsxp