Ugri

This is another subject, I am not part of the organization. Point being the case was being handled, the screenshot was misleading, the admin tried to be helpful and deserved no public shaming. Using SM this way can be harmful

You are right. Its not about the admin, its about structural problems that led to this point. 1) Dont make it just 1 persons job to ban ppl 2) show 0 tolerance for racism and fascism (f.e. by explicitly adding it to the no-gos on W3C community guidelines)

Yet the tweet was not about the racist but about the admin, and it was misleading. Which was not honest and wrong. Even if you feel the organization is not perfect, that does not allow public shaming. That was the point of my tweet you are answering to

Its interwined. When you got an admin declining to ban someone for racism & death threats (although he has the technical option to do so) and doing so in a mocking manner - its pretty problematic, ngl.

He did not have the option to do so, are you doing this on purpose?

even if he couldnt (which i doubt). He is in a clear position of power (as member of W3C-Team) and he uses it to mock Demu. What else is Demu supposed to do?

wait for the admin to wake up and not shame a guy in front of 8k people

...and ignore the blatant ignorance of the admin, who seems to think that death threats are funny and normal? We need structures to prevent situations like this, not singular bans 12h after something happened.