[thulle]

> If you're going to sanction somebody, keep at least some screenshots around.

That might not've been a consideration when the offending posts were removed. The ones doing the removal might not even be the same people handling suspensions.

> I could find nothing even questionable the banned person did.

That might be an issue of legitimacy. I'm involved in some discord modding, and we got admin-only channels mirroring the others to keep logs of everything. I have no idea how suspensions are handled in the NixOS community though, maybe moderators are picked to handle things in their own discretion.

> The fact that you don't agree with some person on an issue is no grounds for a ban.

That's not what's happening here though, it's the intentionally provocative behaviour?

Say some person argues that Israel is a nazi state dehumanizingly enough to get a warning, and gets told to stop derailing everything into a discussion about that since it's a detriment to a community that in itself has no connection to the issue. Agreeing to this they instead start sporting a green flag, or a little image with a free country between a river and a sea - maybe with a green flag on it - while linking to a page about how Israel is a nazi state. Then the issue the moderators have to consider isn't whether they agree on how to describe Israel, but if the actions of the warned person are still acting inflammatory and derailing the community.

A bit over the top example to make it clearer, if you find it an incomparable situation just tone down the actions in it accordingly.

[kreetx]

Right, I get that there are topics that are more sensitive than others and there are links and images which I guess are forbidden to use (a swastika for example). But if the issue at hand is about eating meat (?), then is having a meat loaf as the background image (or even a profile image which one would see involuntarily) reason to ban anyone? It is maybe provocative, but the thing to do there is ignore it, not ban it.

[thulle]

The point seems to escape you, it isn't about the sensitivity of the issue, but about if the behaviour is changed or not.

[neonsunset]

In this case mods just found a convenient excuse to ban the "outgroup" member based on ideological lines of demarcation (specifically the unwoke link in the bio). It is never about the facts. If a convenient argument exists, it will be made, if it doesn't, it or the facts for it will be made up soon enough.