I don't like to make up these kinds of threads. Generally I don't care much about the inability to fail some of the mods / admins, and it isn't the crux of this post.
Regardless, it appears that a member was banned for "calling out" SkinnyPupp in this post, which no longer contains the reason why he was banned. holy Sh*t! Massive earthquake just hit Japan! the member's post was magically edited (presumably by SkinnyPupp) to remove the content for which I believe the person was banned
. This is what I have issue with. The poster's rebuke of SP was actually quite restrained and reasonably diplomatic - there has been far worse that has been left to fester here. The poster's rebuke was absolutely Work Safe.
There is and was no reason to remove that content, and furthermore, there is no reason to remove that content without even indicating that it was editted by an admin. There are certainly times where a mod/admin SHOULD edit a normal user's posts (personal info being posted, locals on the girlie threads) but this is not one of them.
It appears that the member was banned with no warning. I personally think this is ridiculously excessive, but is the admin's prerogative, no matter how heavy handed, inelegant and personally-driven it is.
I do kindly suggest the admin and mod team consider to exercising a lighter hand when it comes to posts where they feel they are insulted. For example,
I would suggest that an admin/mod not carry out the sanction where they are personally insulted. Involving another moderator or admin would show a greater amount of fairness. I would also suggest that there be no ghost or ninja edits. This comes down to credibility and integrity.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled earthquake/rice/girlie threads.