Thread:Auraestus/@comment-27097330-20160824163647/@comment-26347028-20160827072740

ChazmanianDevil wrote: No, to be personal space. Are houses lawless anarchy? I don't care about banning, I'm talking about the right to remove messages mainly.

First off, I seem to remember one of your posts on Tyb's wall saying that you convinced Auraestus to change the message wall rules, which would contradict what you say here.

Secondly, that is spot he most ridiculous technicality I've ever heard, and it doesn't even make sense. Actually, Eureka and Shade were just action as standins for Aurae, so while they had the power to do that while he was gone, he's now back, and they now have as much authority as you or me. And I have a feeling Aurae doesn't want to talk about this.

And finally, a question. Do you believe message walls should have the same rules as forums? Most aren't, no. As most Message Walls aren't problematic here. But some are, and for that there are laws even then to make it so there needs to be a fair amount of suspicion to even look in. Since there's no privacy here anyway, this is no invasion of privacy, and so it's different. Some people abuse their privacy in the real world, and we have no privacy here. We're talking about a different sort of abuse. This mystical "right" to do whatever you want. Why, since they have the same power as Discussion Moderators, should they not have the same restrictions?

Well, I had a conversation in which he agreed that there needed to be a reason for banning etc. from your wall. I think that's about as clear as it needs to be. The fact that I have a communication line and wrote the rules have some part to play here. I was talking about what needed to be covered, and so I brought it up with Glosur. There's a difference between me writing something and wanting confirmation I'm doing it right and me randomly asserting dominance - not to mention the latter would fail every time.

And if you look at it, then yes while standing in they had the same authority, as you admit. And in that time they upheld the decision to add that. To now change that decision would require a similar or higher authority to do. If Glosur doesn't want to talk about this, it's his choice. But it's not your choice to randomly allocate yourself the position to tell everyone that it's suddenly a community vote. If he wants a community vote he'll hold one, and then act accordingly. But in the same way as a referendum doesn't actually bear any more relevance than informing parliament's decisions, the same is true here. It doesn't actually do anything, just makes it clear what the people want.