"The mods can ban who the fick they want. It's their forum and we post at their pleasure", but "Firm rules are entirely pointless because there is always some rules-lawyering troll who will attempt to abuse it with technicalities. "
If you feel that you post at the mods' pleasure, then that is your issue. I do not give a rat's tail about what the mods may think about any of my posts, as long as when they have a beef with one of them, that they clearly communicate with me what their objection is. As far as firm rules being pointless, don't you think that it is exactly firm rules which will make it difficult for rules-lawyering trolls to abuse them with technicalities?
There is nothing technical about:
- Thou shalt not use foul language.
-Thou shalt not use insulting words and language toward a fellow forum user.
-Thou shalt not post articles which have as sole purpose to demean and/or denigrate another race, religion and/or country.
-Thou shalt not ignore a mod's demands for answers to his questions.
-Thou shalt not engage in the creation of sock puppet accounts.
Any mod worth his salt could keep an eye on any forum with some clear and reasonable rules and make just banning decisions based on such rules.. Maybe you enjoy some dictatorial traits in your mods, I do not.
By the way, were you not the one who was willing to steal $13,000 found in an envelope? Oh, yes, unless the money was someone's life savings. I am sure you would canvass the neighborhood to find out who the money belonged to and if it was someone's life savings you would surely hand them the envelope. So, if you did not find anyone meeting that criterion you would do, what? Pocket the money? What an utterly hypocritical way to look at things. The money still does not belong to you, even though you cannot find anyone whose life savings it is. I can see why firm rules appear pointless to someone with that attitude.
A matter of ethics, don't you know!