> What they've missed is the "yet" part of "hasn't been banned yet" -- that other account may be banned in future, or if they drop the destructive behaviour they may have all the measures removed.
That's a problem though. If you let some murderers roam free and when somebody says "you arrested me when I murdered somebody, why aren't you arresting them", you say "hey, you don't know that we don't arrest them, we're just haven't arrested them yet. Please wait 100 years to see whether we really don't arrest them".
I don't know what the original comment was about etc, but "maybe it'll eventually be consistent" isn't a good answer to claims of inconsistency. Maybe it will, but it probably won't. If behavior is treated differently, the best prediction is that it will continue to be treated differently.
The original comment is about dang jumpyness and unfairness in moderation. He won't touch some people for the things he will shadowban or downweight others. Whatever you can praise dang for, moderation isn't one of those things. On HN there are effectively no rules and no objectivity, only what moderators say goes.
That's a problem though. If you let some murderers roam free and when somebody says "you arrested me when I murdered somebody, why aren't you arresting them", you say "hey, you don't know that we don't arrest them, we're just haven't arrested them yet. Please wait 100 years to see whether we really don't arrest them".
I don't know what the original comment was about etc, but "maybe it'll eventually be consistent" isn't a good answer to claims of inconsistency. Maybe it will, but it probably won't. If behavior is treated differently, the best prediction is that it will continue to be treated differently.