The Board stepped in, and overruled the mods ho banned someone for saying “wtf” (because it’s “code for an obscenity”) on that bonkers decision: “there is no explicit reference to profanity in the Etiquette Guidelines”
may I kindly ask you to replace the misleading title of this thread by a more neutral title?
“Censorship” is a hard term. In this case, it was not about the board “censoring” or muting someone.
Not to mention that the ban was not for the “wtf” it was for the resulting argument over if it was problematic or not.
Thank you for sorting this out. Some further facts.
The moderation team has apparently disagreed whether a certain
short-time ban was appropriate or not. The moderation team therefore
asked the board for clarification about the Etiquette Guideline.
The board did not found any explicit or implicit reference to obscenity
in the Etiquette Guideline.
The board was not tasked to and did not overrule anything.
The board was not tasked to and did not judge over a certain post on
The board was not tasked to and did not judge over a certain act of
The ban that gave rise to this agenda topic had long been expired and no
follow-up ban had happened when the board had the topic on its agenda.