Thread:Auraestus/@comment-27097330-20160824163647/@comment-26347028-20160827171032

There is no reason for users to have these powers except to do what they like, is there? What does a chat moderator do in the chat that a normal moderator can't? We may aswell call everyone "Message Wall Moderators" but it would be precisely meaningless, no? In the same way as it relieves stress from moderators if the chat is policed by chat moderators, so too if every wall now has designated police. Although, I don't know how you're stretching that to suddenly being unregulated.

Convenient, perhaps, but certainly not planned. So far as I was aware, Glosur supported this venture as he stated previously. I think "parading" is a bit of a stretch, too, since in theory nothing was actually being done anyway as the rules technically didn't even allow for that sort of thing, which they now do. However, all I pointed out was the two words Glosur used - "within reason" - which I think is hardly "parading" something, despite the fact that I may have put that into words, but it was no less Glosur's decision first-hand. And while, yes, I'm not saying you can't appeal for Glosur's support, if he doesn't reply then no - you can't run off and take it out of his hands. If he wants to hold a referendum, he will hold one. If he doesn't want to make the decision, he won't. But I'm not here to say he'll ignore you and you're not here to say that a referendum should happen anyway, so don't imply that.