Thread:AmazingPythor/@comment-4964341-20161019022516/@comment-25656509-20161020195414

TheShadowAssassin wrote: Sir Guurahk wrote: I did in fact see that statement. Which leads me to ask why couldn't you see the readily available logs from the previous day before being so vocal about it...? I mean if you had just said something like "They deserve a ban or smt" a lack of info like that would have been tolerable, but you seemed pretty insistent about it.

I'm not attacking you, I'm pointing out your amusing lack of consistency ''while asking for consistency. '' Pretty sure that I mentioned something about needing to do school after the whole fiasco had been figured out and the bans had been dealt? I did, yes? So surely I was in a hurry? Do I have all of the time in the world to spend on issues like these?

Is it wrong to expect consistency from administrators? Yes, but then you could have waited to have all the info down correctly.

No, it's not. But to be honest I think that they are, in fact, notably consistent. And really, it seems as if "consistency" is no longer a word with an objective meaning, it all being open to debate and subjectivity by the beholder (which incidentally actually increases inconsistence).

I think a two weeks ban is appropiate. As it has been explained, 2 weeks is pretty standard for personal attacks, and a lot of people who were properly informed (until proven otherwise!) seemed, and seem still, to agree with it. I think it's pretty consistent.