So here is my proposed solution. I am proposing a virtual bail bond where I will stand bail for Mitchymo, the bond being my lpsg membership. I suggest he is un-banned conditional on good behaviour (exactly as before). If these terms are breached both he and I are to be banned. In my case this would be without discussion or argument or reapplication.
Jason, your heart is in the right place, but this is something that is better left alone for now. I made the same offer in the past. In retrospect, I would not do it again. I feel that the Moderator team has gone to great lengths over the past two years to dot every "i" and cross every"t" in regards to the Terms of Service. The expectations are very clear. I like Mitchymo. I had some nice interactions with him over the weekend. Oddly enough, I had asked him how long it had been since he was reinstated, and he replied "seven months." Two days later he was banned for violating an agreement he had made with the moderator team. He brought this on himself. I wish he had not done this, but he did.
One of the privileges at this site is the ability to be considered for reinstatement. If you are fortunate enough to be granted reinstatement, you have an obligation to live up to the expectations of the Moderator Team. The longevity and success of the reinstated member is in their hands, not another member as bail bondsman; and, historically, Jason, most have failed. However, I don't think that Mitchymo would fail you. It's an unnecessary gesture when what he needs to do—if and when he wants to do so—is already in place.
From my experience, the less drama concerning a banning works better in the banned member's behalf. Mitchymo knows what he needs to do. Let this remain between him and the Moderator team for now.
You're a kind man, Jason, and your proposal speaks volumes about you.
Take care and have a good Christmas and New Year, Mitch, and I hope you do the reapplication thing when you can.
Ditto.
Reinstating Banned Members
