Dispute about moderation in rugby forum

That is fine with me if everyone is treated the same way.

I know that if I start responding to posters I disagree with with just crying memes I'd be banned very quickly.

That is two tier moderation.

That post is still up while others around it were edited for the content to be removed. Why the continued differing treatment of posters receiving warnings?

I acknowledge the belated warning but it doesn't really deal with the issue of the two tiered moderation by certain mods.

One mod has warned it but multiple other mods were active in the forum prior to this and did nothing, the most obvious example being @ShamoBuc who warned other posts around it but refused to give a warning to this offending post when I originally reported it and then doubled and tripled down in their defense of it in PMs with me.

From your point of view does that post break any/all of the rugby charter rules that I listed? I'd understand if this was a grey area but this seems so blatant - with posters regularly warned and banned in that forum for far, far less.

Well isn't this a chicken or egg scenario?

If there is two tiered moderation then of course the posters who support a certain team will have worse records than a similar poster of another, where the mod is always giving them the benefit of the doubt. Using a bad record as a feedback loop to justify clearly improper actions by mods is simply a badly thought out approach. With that said, I really dont get what you're implying about my record, I've received a handful of warnings coming up on two decades here.

I'd hardly pat the system on the back as it working well when it took that long for one of the many active mods to warn that abusive post and only after I opened two threads complaining about it.

While abusive posts with no other content are being ignored, posters from other provinces are getting straight points for their opinion that mods simply dislike. If the same warning stick was used since Saturday on posts talking down Leinster that could be deemed as provocative to their fanbase then there would barely be a poster left on the forum. I'm not calling for all those posts to be warned, just a level playing field in moderation.

If this direct abuse is being repeatedly justified by a mod then do you not see the issue that much minor infractions will obviously be let away with, while other posters wont receive the same leeway? It is impossible to modify posting style if rules aren't enforced consistently - it is the same in rugby, where you cant play to a ref's interpretation of the laws if they keep changing depending on who has the ball.

The rugby forum has hemorrhaged good posters recently, in part because of this exact stuff.