Originally Posted by
Kilo11
Seeing the latest back and forth, I am going to do something stupid, and potentially ruffle everyone's feathers...
Nearly everyone above is accusing the other side of being partisan or acting in bad faith, and from my vantage, it appears that this is correct. The majority of people who are weighing in here have a long history of activity in the same areas where Pontifex Maximus likes to hang, and that clearly is souring the discussion. And further, from looking closely at the above posts, I think that Gig, Narf, and myself are the only ones here talking who don't have a lot of history with Ponti in the mudpit or other areas of the site (which is where all this muck seems to be coming from). Given that, I think it may be beneficial if those with previous grievances or axes to grind do their best to leave those out of this ostrakon, and only post facts relevant to this case. What happened in other cases concerning individuals related to your camp is besides the point. The question is whether Pontifex Maximus has acted in a way that merits his being divested of citizenship. Whether other individuals ought to lose some ranks or privileges and didn't does not matter here. Or at least, it should not matter here. Maybe mistakes were made before. Maybe we could afford to be more lenient, or had to be more strict, due to different circumstances. But either way, there is a question before us now which should be weighed upon given the facts of now. Your pasts together should not factor into that in the least.
And again, I find it rather decisive that Ponti's defense is essentially "I don't even care about citizenship. Do what you will." If he cares so little about it, then that partly explains his lack of care when posting or addressing other members, and that also provides the grounds for loss of citizenship in my book. If he can't be bothered to be a good citizen, because he doesn't care about citizenship, then why should we fight about whether or not he keeps it? Let him go, and if he decides later that he would indeed like to come back, then that door is always open, and he can re-apply under a patron. I don't see any problem with that, and in the meantime, we can still talk to him, have conversations, and as per Adrian's comments, try to help him "work through the very obvious breakdown he's having". But I do not think his flagrant disregard for civility or the institutions here is reason for the rest of us to tear at each other's throats.