So what ? We allow everything ?
Not even going to respond to that as I haven't asked for "everything." What I would like to see is an admission that GMs make mistakes.
Moderation is not an exact science, it's not head or tail
Well, that's not quite an admission is it?
You would say they are 90, moderation think they are 110, other people will think they are 130.
The only thing important to me there is the part where I say they are 90. You can argue its 110 all you like, but if I know my 90 from my 110, even when the 100 we're talking about is imaginary, because really, that's all the rules here are. Basically you're right; what is against the rules is what the BBs think is against the rules, because as Mike Franks says its not clear what the rules are. And where we don't know what the rules are and what punishments might follow, we're going to get people who feel they're on the wrong end of a decision. Especially in a case where a previously punished user is treated more harshly for doing less than someone who is commiting their first "offence."
I'm truly sorry that you think we're in some sort of circus here. I don't feel that I'm being unfair, except perhaps that it always seems to be you I'm replying to, for which I am also sorry. This is certainly not personal. I've never particularly liked unfairness, and when I see it, I feel free to comment on it.
You keep saying its the BBs who decide what's allowed and apply the rules through the GMs. That implies the GMs operate like bots without any thought, which I think we both know is wrong. I don't argue that the BBs can decide what they like. However I too can decide what I like, and when I don't like something I don't feel its wrong to say so. You'd like me to not to, but unfortunately as long as I stay within the rules, and I believe I do, that's just not going to happen.