Quote Originally Posted by Jacoby_Ellsbury;518872 View Post
Why should past acts be considered when deciding to ban someone (for a mere week) who definitely deserved it, was definitely looking to instigate, and had been doing this to various people unpunished for a while now?

To be compeletely honest, I haven't seen anything from him in my time here that would warrant that 'Talksox nicest member' title he had for so long. His 'generosity' tends to be neutralized by what seems to be non-stop snittiness and wiseassery. I'm not claiming I'm a saint either, or close to it, but to not ban someone who was CLEARLY out of line just because of what he did months/years ago is pretty silly. I would have given him 10 days to 2 weeks instead of one week. I don't agree with the premise that the baitee should punished just as much as the baiter. When people do get banned for conflicts like this, that seems to be the general route taken, and I don't know why.

All in theory, I have no say in this.
You're right, his past actions shouldn't be a factor when a ban is considered. He deserved it and rightfully so, I was just surprised. But as for his generosity, he's put a lot of his own personal money into the site, including cash prizes for contests, game tickets, fairly expensive christmas presents for everyone, t-shirts, etc. Doesn't excuse his actions, but we (those of us who were here) shouldn't forget his generosity either.