User blog comment:-Algol-/Of policies, admins and the community/@comment-2250460-20130127180005/@comment-4548710-20130128191228

Here are the facts: there were two seperate votings on chat policy, both times Ygrain went around and contacted various users to alert them to what was going on. In the first round most of the people Ygrain contacted voted no, and at least some voted neutral. In the second round every person Ygrain contacted voted no, and she did not contact again those who did not vote no the first time. Additionally, almost if not all of everyone who voted no the second time had been contacted by Ygrain. 4Ferelden contacted Lancer to tell him that Ygrain was contacting users, and Ygrain was soon banned in accordance with a precedent set by commdor. Next the policy is passed because all admins are in favour, and likely because nearly if not every person who voted no was a person that Ygrain contacted. Incidentally, 4Ferelden neglected to mention that he was contacted by Ygrain in the first round of voting.

Going into my opinion on the facts now: Can this be seen as canvassing even though Ygrain said nothing to openly sway votes? Certainly. Was it intended as such? Having had a lot of experience with her, no part of me believes that- but I can see how the admins would. Since this was the conclusion the admins came to, the next portion of this post will go with that assumption.

Assuming all no votes were canvassed, it doesn't make since to do a second vote because there was no legitimate opposition, so it would make sense for the admins to pass it. What could they do? A recount? What if votes are canvassed again? Or what if those who were already canvassed to vote no continue to do so? I can see why the measure was passed despite all the no votes. I personally would have dropped the issue until it had mostly faded from memory, then started a new vote so that those whose votes had been canvassed might have lost interest.

As for Ygrain, working with the assumption that she was canvassing (not an assumption I agree with but can understand as I've said before) it makes sense for some sort of disciplinary action to be taken as it clearly violates the precedent set by Commdor. Do I think a 2 week ban and not a warning is rather harsh? Yes, and here's why- Ygrain did not know the precedent existed. Some may say it was her responsibility to know it did, but that's unfair if you ask me. Unlike wikia rules which are clearly notated and linked to every editor upon their arrival, this precedent exists in a rather obscure forum that only a very small portion of the community is likely to have read. Realistically, in order to reasonably expect Ygrain to be aware of this precedent- we must first expect her to have read all forums in which precedents may have been established- think about how many forums that is for a second, and it becomes clear why expecting Ygrain to know this precedent is an unreasonable expectation. Additionally, in a private conversation with Lancer over on the DA wiki not so long ago, he had told me that not even the admins know every existing precedent. Should Ygrain be expected to have a complete knowledge of precedents when even the admins lack such a thing? Some will no doubt say that canvassing being a punishable offense should be self evident, but self evident in a lot of cases, is not self evident. Ygrain didn't believe what she was doing would be considered canvassing. In short, she was punished for being unaware of a precedent that she did not know existed, and realistically should not have been expected to. And this is assuming that she intended to canvass at all, or was in fact even canvassing.

So, assuming she was canvassing- I would have personally given a warning, but do not fault the admins for doing what they likely thought was best. It was a bad situation, and they felt something had to be done.

Assuming she wasn't canvassing, the whole thing is rather unfair- but I can still understand why the admins acted in the way they did.

Anyway, that's my small novella on the issue. Sorry it takes up so much space, but I think some of the things here weren't said and needed to be.