Re:Luigi Mangione's account has been renamed on Stack Overflow
by fabian2k on Thursday January 09, 2025 @04:19AM
(#42643397)
This specific user has a very long history on SO and the rest of the network. You have to assume that this history might have played a part in the decision to suspend instead of only warning.
Re:Luigi Mangione's account has been renamed on Stack Overflow
by DangitBobby on Thursday January 09, 2025 @10:47AM
(#42646766)
No real reason to assume that.
Re:Luigi Mangione's account has been renamed on Stack Overflow
by fabian2k on Thursday January 09, 2025 @11:56AM
(#42647518)
1 year suspensions are not handed out for first offenses. The guidelines for mods are to give escalating suspensions for 7/30/365 days, so this is most likely at least the third suspension for this user.
Re:Luigi Mangione's account has been renamed on Stack Overflow
by croemer on Thursday January 09, 2025 @12:59PM
(#42648160)
This case could be different. Do you know he was suspended before? It makes sense that they'd want to ban him for a year if this is retribution. It all checks out. The email doesn't mention a previous ban which I'd expect to be mentioned if it was a factor.
Re:Luigi Mangione's account has been renamed on Stack Overflow
by fabian2k on Thursday January 09, 2025 @02:15PM
(#42648903)
This specific user has been suspended multiple times on different sites of the SE network. I don't know exactly how often.
Re:Luigi Mangione's account has been renamed on Stack Overflow
by immibis on Saturday January 11, 2025 @03:40AM
(#42664377)
I received a 1 year suspension on Meta for:
* I asked a question about a moderation policy (are we allowed to delete comments? here are two conflicting sources. Which one is correct?)
* A moderator requested an edit in a comment, then shortly after, deleted it due to not having that edit.
* Since there's no way to edit a deleted question, I posted it again with the edit.
I think the ban was actually for questioning SE's inconsistency. Like all dictatorships, they punish you for not obeying in advance.
I am aware of vote fraud and it's ok that SO warns/suspends if one engages in it. In this case it arguably does. However it needs to be a proportionate response to the action, and not done as retaliation.
I'm also a fairly high reputation SO contributor (in current rankings top 150).