Well, tell your BFF Jill she’s banned, too.

I have not seen anyone give you a specific answer regarding a better way of handling this situation. I would like to try to do so.

You mentioned that an exhaustive list of terms is not practical, and I agree with that assessment. You also state that you have distilled the rule down to “be civil”. This seems to be an oversimplification requiring further explanation whenever an infraction arises, which seems equally impractical.

A better solution can most likely be found between the two extremes. Clarifying text added to the “be civil” rule might make your stance on what constitutes incivility more apparent.

“Be civil: dismissive, insulting, or overly antagonistic interactions will be subject to action at the discretion of the moderators.”

If these comments represent your thought-out responses to the spotlight that has been shone on your shortcomings as a moderator, I would suggest that you did not allow those thoughts proper time to prove. What we’re left with are overly dense rationalizations that have sadly fallen flat.

There are behaviors and incidents from months ago cited in the OP. How slow is slow enough for you? What’s the acceptable time frame to have a retrospective look at a moderator’s poor track record?

The majority of actions and interactions Stamets included are in the public record. The one bit of inside knowledge appears to be something .world staff would be privy to. How much advance notice do you need in order to comment?

Most people are reading these incidents for at least a second time right now, having seen them when they were initially called out as well. Most members of this community follow conversations in this community closely. Most participants understand that responses come after calls, hence the term “call-and-response.”

I do wonder how often you’ve encouraged Jordan to be slower and more considerate in his exchanges.

Any pro-Israel post is currently a de facto call for genocide.

A public proclamation of your ineptitude at simple tasks is an interesting way of defending the utility of LLMs.