The KetKat stuff is just lol
She was the one who got me banned, never a warn or prior ban, instant perm. There were all kinds of shenanigans involved, including a mod editing a damning post she made an hour after the ban.
I know
No, it's just that many of our mods, including trans ones, have been stressing out over the past few days. Mods are all volunteers, they're all human beings who deserve respect. Please try to understand that. Being an admin or a moderator for this site can be a thankless, time consuming volunteering effort. It wears you down over time. I'd always encourage people to remember that. At the end of the day, the staff is on your side, they're just volunteers constrained by time and energy. To be very clear: We're talking about inappropriate access of private conversations between staff members. Saying more than that would involve violating the privacy of the individuals involved, which we will not do. No one has been banned for offering sincere feedback. Again this is a personal matter and it will remain that way. The ban in question involves the abuse of a personal relationship between the poster in question and a former moderator. This is now a private matter and not for public discussion. It has nothing to do with the valid feedback in the rest of the post.
Was Dogmod demodded? 
Just wanted to pop in and say that I hear you. Do we, as a staff, always "get it right"? Not in the slightest. We discuss every report we receive as a team, and ask for the input of staff who may have further insight and a different perspective.
His post mentions "the staff talking in the discord" with a very specific reference to a conversation that happened in a private channel in the staff server. This was a channel that had been created as a safe space for minority members of the staff. Only a very limited number of individuals had access to the channel in question.
This compounds previous suspicions that CHOW CHOW had inappropriate access to the staff server -- he has previously (and has continued in emails) to reference policies using wording found only in staff literature. He has also contacted individual staff members with apparent knowledge of things they mentioned in private.
CHOW CHOW has been unable to explain his access to these conversations, but by process of elimination we are confident that we know how it was done, and that it was highly inappropriate. This is extremely serious and not a situation where inaction was possible.
