Corgi the Gen Z God said:
I'll come back to defend myself. This is not right and it's essentially bringing back old beef months ago. But I'm at work so I can't really do much rn.
If you're continuing behaviour that you got told to stop months ago, then it's okay to "bring back old beef".
@DDM From what I can tell and remember he wasn't spamming the old RVT, he was arguing to defend himself incessantly to the point where he was disrupting the thread. I think this is a really important distinction to make, and isn't something worth banning over, since his warn had nothing to do with that.
Those horrid "unjustified insults behind Cal's back!" are a real nothingburger imo. "Cal is biased against sonic" is really contributing to a member getting banned? His other three messages were him not understanding why you'd take an issue with it, no insults or bad behaviour.
Those "other examples in the thread linked above" were already dealt with with a warning, he should only get in trouble if he continues behaviour, he shouldn't get in trouble for something he was already reported for months ago if there's no more substance.
After reading those Discord scans, all the ones are bad are the ones he got his last warning for. I think the way you're portraying his HR group report is overblown and really goes against the spirit of what we should be aiming for with HR group.
All of those seem like things that a member not very familiar with the rules could reasonably consider reportable offenses. It seems reasonable enough to mistake "The worse person ever" with "One of the worst people to violate Fandom's terms of service", I know that myself and many many others have had miscommunications on that level before. Remembering something you're upset about a little different from reality isn't a false report - it's something that HR group should look into and realize (as I assume they did here).
You deleting his posts definitely isn't a reportable offence, but imo just sending a single report to HR group over one non-reportable offence shouldn't be considered a violation on a user's part, as this heavily discourages people from sending reports to HR group. I want HR group to ultimately be a thing people feel comfortable submitting reports about staff members to, even if not every report ends up resulting in the staff member being found in the wrong.
tl;dr most of this is old, the new stuff is one insanely minor insult of calling a person biased for one verse, and one misguided HR group report. None of this should result in Corgi being banned.
