I don't see the need to repeat the exact phrases used, cause more drama, and make a further spectacle out of the user that was victimized in the speech. I understand how this will satisfy curiosity, but I do not see it having any other positive impact.
The reality of this particular situation is that Dirty is a person known for his polarizing behaviour who has received previous warnings and consequences for his actions. He continued this behaviour, to an extent where it was bordering on harassment of another user. The last particular instance required intervention.
That's the long and short of it, without resorting to posting word for word the gratuitous insults that were used in the cited conversation.
Generally speaking, it seems that if we give an inch, people will take a mile. Previously, it was stressed that all anyone wanted to know was length of ban and simple reason for it. Now we've been providing this information, yet it fails to satisfy. Honestly, the curiosity will only be fulfilled if you were witness to the incident while it took place, and short of that, nobody will feel comfortable or as if they understand everything that occurred.
I'm not sure what you consider "proper procedure". We haven't hidden our method from anyone. We observe a number of incidents, and when they come to a peak, we come to a majority consensus and decide on an action to counter the offending behaviour. If you think there is a more professional way to handle things, I at least, am listening to the suggestion.
|