Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-3184244-20200117003828/@comment-14250-20200117081844

Sannse's blog "staff don't remove" might be better termed "staff SOMETIMES don't remove" or even "staff USUALLY don't remove" to avoid the assumption it means "staff ALWAYS don't remove" since by reading the body, it's pretty clear she's not saying 'never'.

"we so often refuse to get involved" does imply "we occasionally get involved" after all, but it is a rarity.

Tupka I think "Unless they break the Terms of Use, nothing" might be too extreme though, as I notice Sannse says this:
 * staff are most likely to intervene in situations that involve the Fandom Terms of Use or are otherwise very serious

The "or are otherwise" statement appears to imply there are situations other than TOU-breaking where they are likely to get involved, although it's unclear what 'very serious' includes outside of TOU parameters. I expect that exists to allow wiggle room for their personal judgment.

The 'most likely to' rather than 'will only' also implies a tertiary (non-TOU, non-very-serious) category where they might still get involved, but where they would be LEAST likely to.

Given that one step in the resolution process is the ability to propose de-adminship for community discussion, I could see interfering with that freedom as one reason for intervention, and super-long bans inherently do create such a situation.