I'm done here. I've made the point I wanted to. If its not going to be treated seriously and that people are going to jump to "Jake is condoning bigotry", they clearly do not understand the actual issue here.

If you'd like to talk about this with me privately, be my guest. Done checking this thread. Have a good day everyone.

Two of said people came back, one even going out of their way to reactivate an account, to downvote and/or create drama. I wouldn't say that's leaving

Ever considered they didn't voice their opinion and feelings because staff clearly doesn't give a f*** what the community has to say on any matter? Maybe they came back to join in with the fact that someone who at one point had a higher stature here is siding with them for how bulls*** this has been handled?

Two of said people came back, one even going out of their way to reactivate an account, to downvote and/or create drama. I wouldn't say that's leaving

Ever considered they didn't voice their opinion and feelings because staff clearly doesn't give a f*** what the community has to say on any matter?

Jake’s response echoes my thoughts. If you wanna downvote my comment feel free. But I am one of many concerned about the conduct of the moderation team. I have also reached out to them privately and came to an understanding. But yes Mavis was invited by a moderator and instigated more drama.

-Thomas Donofri

Honestly you say you have came to an understanding yet you come here to jump on accusing the moderators of inviting Mavis to harass you and that their actions were completely unsatisfied. Which is it?

It's already been accepted that in calm hindsight a DM would have been more appropriate but the message was left 8 hours without any reaction and the offence caused by deadnaming caused a frustrated reaction after that. So what else is the problem? Again deadnaming is *serious* and actively causes stress and harm in the individual. In the mind of Borb they were given a warning and didn't respond for 8 hours, hence the rather brash reaction. Follow up responses minimising the problem (there was no "I didn't realise it was against the rules" admission, in fact the claim was it wasn't deadnaming or a big deal, if the vocal complaints were about that maybe things would've come out differently) didn't help things either.

There's been a lot of calls from certain vocal people about moderators "accepting responsibility", even though the first post actually did accept mistakes. I've yet to see any reflection from the other side, or any indication they actually regret deadnaming, but I am happy to be proven wrong.

Also a reminder about the community guidelines, deadnaming violates rule 1 warranting an immediate permanent ban (although this was never proposed) as well as rules 3 and 4.

Also rule 2 forbids vote manipulation, but I'd hope nobody here would be doing that. :)

My post directly says its wrong, the other people involved have either left the community or are not interested in this pursuit when that was not the problem to begin with because this isn't the problem that these people have.

I allowed a community member to say don't deadname me?

Yet, moderation allowed, encouraged and happily stood by the 3 comments that made the situation escalate further.