Originally Posted by
Kilo11
I have voted in favor of this, but with one reservation. Many (if not most) of you know that I really do take it seriously that we talk honestly, openly, and civilly with one another, and as such, I think it is important to explain why I voted yes. To me, the biggest thing that is wrong with the current formulation of the article is that it provides no room for forgiveness, or indeed for explanation or exculpation. I think this is simply wrong. Citizenship is not a reward or badge of honor here. It is a position, and one which comes with both rights and responsibilities. As citizens, I do think we should hold the bar higher than where we would expect it to be for your average member posting whatever, or coming for mod downloads. But also, as citizens, we belong to a body together, and we owe it to one another to give (alleged) offenders the opportunity to explain themselves. Perhaps there is no defense for whatever it is that led to their infraction, but in that case, the infraction would stand, and the automatic revocation would go on. I think that is appropriate. But importantly, we ought to give citizens that chance to appeal the infraction, and explain themselves before they are cast out. For that reason, I think this amendment is very worthwhile.
My one bone of contention is that I do not think we need to lower the bar to allow for one standing infraction. That, however, is a debate about forgiveness and leniency, and I believe there are defensible positions on both sides. Personally, I would leave things so that a standing infraction does indeed cause citizenship revocation, but I can equally well see the points for allowing one mistake which can't be explained or appealed away. But whatever one's stance is on the number of infractions which get you booted from the body of citizens, I would hope that everyone agrees that alleged offenders ought to be given a chance to explain their actions before they are summarily dismissed.