If you had taken as much time and trouble in acting against the troll in question BEFORE now, all this would have been prevented, yes?
Gosh golly gee whizz Undefined, I sure am sorry that some of us actually have to earn a living.
If you can take the time and trouble to ban machiaventa or whoever, why do you not act when a troll causes such farcical disruptive situations as these where people have to defend and explain themselves because YOU didn't act in a timely fashion?
I have precisely zero interest (see, it's a valid quantity) in discussing what actions I have or have not taking with you. Frankly, it's none of your business.
Why just ban those whom you arbitrarily act against while not acting likewise against the troll in this instance which has been brought to your notice and reported many times already...
How many times have I explained this to you Undefined?
I DO NOT RECEIVE REPORTED POST NOTIFICATIONS IN THIS SUBFORUM. WHEN I ACT IS BASED ON WHAT I ACTUALLY HAPPEN TO SEE.
with only minor slaps on the wrists which have allowed the troll to continue to manufacture these farcical situations which could have been prevented by your action as mod?
Tach has been subjected to the same treatment as everybody else.
Please stop making the victim out to be the problem when some timely troll banning of all the trolls would have made all this particular to-do this UNNECESSARY. Thanks.
Oh god, here we go again. Poor me, stop picking on me, stop victim blaming.
The only actions I have held you accountable for are your own. I warned you dozens of times that if you kept responding to Tach in the provocative way you were that any action taken would have to be unilateral. I also told you that the way you react to Tach makes it difficult for moderators to take action against you. I have essentially handed you, on a gilded platter, the road map with directions on how to get Tach permabanned without getting yourself permabanned in the process and your response is to
falsely accuse me of victim blaming.
"But he started it" is not a valid defense. It's not a valid defense for a five year old child, and it certainly isn't a valid defense for a 63 year old grown man. I would even go as far as contesting that your actions would fail the legal test of "Is this what a reaonably minded person would do" that is required for the legal defense of self defense.
In fact, do you know what I just realized? This subforum is unmoderated, which means that any moderation taking place is down to:
1. Moderators that are active in the thread and happen to see the post in question.
2. Adminstrators or Superadmins receiving reported post notifications.
Perhaps before pursuing your invective rhetoric further you should stop and consider what that implies.