Dialogues with Moderators

Rameliya could have received all 100 points last year, but she didn't receive even 1. I felt sorry for her. Now I see that I was wrong. (

Dyrman, as you yourself pointed out, Rameliya had no points before the conflict, and then suddenly, 100 points appeared! How is this to be understood?
Essentially, you instantly awarded her these points + immediately, without any warning, blocked her profile. This is at least strange.
Don't you think so? There is a clear display of negative emotions and personal dislike.

Added 1 minute ago
Goblin_Iks we don't know this character.

Added 22 minutes ago

After reviewing this episode, I can highlight the following:
a) I personally don't see any insults in these two messages, but if you want to, you can find them even where they don't exist. The only difference is that the moderator can take action against the user, but the user cannot take action against the moderator.

I completely agree with this statement. The moderator's rights are unlimited, while the rights of an ordinary forum participant are severely restricted.

... the moderator's actions as such are not being discussed; it is simply a statement of fact.

This is a very important point. A moderator can block any user without any explanation. Moderators are also people - they can make mistakes, acting under the influence of emotions and feelings. Therefore, it might be worth introducing a rule for the moderator: first, notify the user, warning them about a possible ban, give them time to think - to correct themselves (1-2 days), and then ban them if they wish.
In the case of the recent episode (atlant108 and Rameliya), they were banned immediately, without warning or time to think.

c) in the absence of an administrator on the forum, there is nowhere to complain about the moderator, which means that the last word always remains with him (even if he is wrong).

Unfortunately, this is true. A sad statement of fact. The moderator is ALWAYS right. If he is wrong, then see point one.

With the exception of the social section and the third Heroes section, the forum is now almost dead and is going through far from its best times. To arbitrarily award points, ban non-malicious users, and create a bad reputation for the forum is not the best way to help it. Can't we show a little flexibility?

Yes, there are few of us now. And conflicts clearly lead to nothing good. The fact that moderator Dyrman knows the forum's punishment system thoroughly and instantly applies penalty sanctions to ANY forum participant is, of course, a plus for him, but Dyrman is guided only by the law, and the law without mercy leads to the destruction of not only the atmosphere on the forum, but also kills the interest and enthusiasm of many forum participants. When they are banned, many of them get offended and will not return to the forum. Trying to prove their innocence is extremely difficult and takes a lot of time and effort - and you can see this yourself!

Added 5 minutes ago

I didn't allow it. My position has always been that there are private messages for such links.

atlant108 showed me this message from the moderator, so I saw it with my own eyes. When his profile is unblocked, I will ask him to show it to everyone.

Why are you referring to these points? Awarding a user points, notifying him of a violation - is this an insult?

Ment, moderator Durman instantly banned both forum participants, without giving them a chance to justify themselves or explain. Even in court, when a trial is held and a verdict is passed, the defendant has a lawyer and the last word.