Comment: Regarding The Granger (separate response)

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Negative. (see in situ)

TwelveOhOne's picture

Regarding The Granger (separate response)

You, and others, seem to think I had something to do with her actions that led to her banning.

I did not, apart from repeatedly pointing her to the rules and hoping (against hope, apparently) that she would change her behavior.

She (and/or her husband, and/or whoever else had access to that account) could have at any time stopped her (their) violations of http://dailypaul.com/guide. However, she (etc) chose not to.

It was her choice to continue belittling people, attacking people, "crying wolf" and continually violating the rules.

Michael gave her a whole lot of leeway, much more so than (in my observation) he had given Fishyculture about a year ago when she was banned. I've since learned additional information regarding her banning that made me reconsider my initial position.

Perhaps, you yourself might benefit from reconsidering your initial position regarding this most recent banning.

Remember: TwelveOhOne is not a moderator! TwelveOhOne cannot have banned someone. For someone to be banned, means a moderator was convinced that the output of someone was not appropriate.

So please, sulk if you must, but don't point your anger at me, because I didn't do it. She did, using her output. Your anger should appropriately be pointed at The Granger account and whoever was typing into it, as it was that person or people which provided the output that the moderator took issue with.

I love you. I'm sorry. Please forgive me. Thank you.
http://fija.org - Fully Informed Jury Association
http://jsjinc.net - Jin Shin Jyutsu (energy healing)