Taylor Swift: Appeal against an appeal

I’m looking for an explanation as to why none of the admins have bothered to address my appeal in the 'Banned Users Corner.'

What is even the point of having a 'Banned Users Corner' if it's just going to be ignored?

Since you decided to complain about Taylor Swift, even though you ended up banned because of a strike I personally issued. You even admitted it yourself in your appeal by trying to shift all the blame back onto her. The truth is, she had nothing to say to you because she wasn't the one who banned you; I simply refused to entertain such a pathetic attempt at spinning the situation.

Is this some kind of inside joke or what?

I’m over here in the "ban corner" trying to appeal my suspension. Am I at least entitled to have someone actually acknowledge my appeal, or is this whole thing just a big game of "not me, not him"?

Look, I’d settle for someone just telling me to "get lost, you're being annoying," honestly. But even that? Apparently, we little forum nobodies aren't even worth the breath it takes to write a single sentence. 🤷

This isn't some kind of joke... If you want to contest a ban, there's a specific section for appeals. You received this ban because of my specific warning, yet in your own appeal, you explicitly state that you aren't appealing that particular warning. You can appeal previous warnings, but those should have been addressed at the moment they were issued—not after another moderator's actions caused them to accumulate and trigger an automatic account suspension.

Consider this hypothetical, absurd scenario: imagine someone receives two warnings for harassment, each lasting 60 days. A month later, they receive a third warning of any kind, which triggers a full account ban. Suddenly, the user tries to dispute those first two original warnings as a way to get the current ban lifted. This is an extreme example and hasn't actually happened here, but it highlights the fundamental issue: if you intend to challenge a warning, you need to do it when it happens, rather than waiting until its accumulation leads to a final consequence.

Aha, okay, I see where we're at now. Honestly, though, I feel like this could have been handled much more directly in the 'ban appeals' section, don't you think? 🤷

Anyway, thanks for the heads-up—even if it is a bit late. A whole week... 😁

Ah, my apologies. It seems I really should have offered one. 🙈
At the time, I didn't think it was necessary, given how you presented yourself in the Zalbam—as if you had every single fact at your fingertips. I suppose I took your input a bit too lightly.

William Bennett53 said:My bad—I probably should have. 🙈
At the time, I didn't think an apology was necessary since you were acting like you had all the facts right, so I just didn't take you seriously.

Mea culpa. Next time I'll be more serious, and I'll make sure to offer my apologies in a timely fashion—though, if my experience is anything to go by, complaining rarely gets anyone anywhere...

Since you're already here, though, could you shed some light on why I got flagged in that one post of mine? You know, the one where I asked: "Can you explain why you're a woman instead of a Nile hippo, seeing as our fine moderator can't?"

Well, you're the one who handed out the penalty, so walk me through exactly what part of that was considered trolling. I'd love to learn how to stay in line so I don't keep making the same mistakes. 🙂

What exactly constitutes the trolling in this situation, where you keep badgering two people by repeatedly demanding they explain why they aren't Nile horses?
With all due respect to Nile horses, that wasn't particularly kind.

Yeah, I actually asked my interlocutors why women—specifically women, rather than, say, hippos—were being discussed, since the debate was centered on female essence. I just wanted to hear their take on what defines womanhood versus something else entirely... 🤷

Look, the question is basically on par with the two of us debating what makes us human. If I were to ask you what makes you a person instead of, I don't know, a mosquito? Or a mushroom, an orangutan, a fruit fly, or even a hippo? If we're discussing the very nature of being, then I don't see any trolling here—I was being deadly serious... 🤷

For instance, I could have asked my conversationalist what makes them a woman rather than a non-woman, but that just sounds ridiculous. How would you even go about asking someone what makes them a woman instead of something else? 🤷 I mean, what’s wrong with hippos? Is there some other animal that would be more "acceptable" to use in this context?