Please see subject post by Opty (Aug 27, 11 04:55PM).

As I advised in my prior post, it was me (SGE1) that deleted Bushleague's original post, and I replied to his repost.

Think about what's going on here.

I could have reported and processed Bushleagues's post with a warning (or even booted him) but elected to assume his ridiculous exageration of the facts was simply an error. Most would not offer that "break", but automatically assume he was bashing and act accordingly. Seriously, his post was a violation in this regard alone.

Then add the aspect Opty reported: criticizing HL behavior - also a stated violation per Agora. He reported it, could have gone ahead and acted on it, but didn't. Why? Because he still feels as I used to - that an HL should not report AND process a violation unilaterally, but should allow "another set of eyes" to make the final determination. This in the interest of maintaining HL integrity.

So, two reasonably clear violations in the reported Bushleague post.

Ron accuses Opty of bias for simply having reported it. Just reporting it!

Bias? It was Ron who processed a violation report for a post likely containing two violations with an "Ignore Violation". Why would he do that? To keep that post alive and visible, knowing it contains erroneous negative info? Because Bushleague is considered a "comrad"? To further demonstrate his disrespect of the Rules of Use?

And then to suggest bias of Opty who intentionally did not process the report in the interest of integrity? Seriously? If there were truly any bias on Opty's part, he would have processed Bushleague's post with a warning at minimum, or booted him. Ron's accusation makes no sense, nor does his action to "Ignore Violation".

Is there any perception of "inappropriateness" by Agora management?

Respectfully,

SGE