So, the necessary background here is that /r/Canada has a rule in the sidebar about not "rabble-rousing". This is broadly defined in their rules, but basically it comes down to a combination of not being rude or hostile towards people, and not being openly bigoted. Now, anyone who regularly participates in /r/Canada knows that hostility can be seen all the time - towards people with certain viewpoints.

This is not a post, as you'd expect from that introduction, about "hate facts" - wall-of-text posts with statistics inconvenient to "left-wing" (sigh) narratives usually actually survive. Nor is it a post about the overall mod team - one of them is also a mod of /r/metacanada, and thus fully accustomed to... shall we say, heterodox Canadian political views.

This is a post about the mod team's most junior human mod, /u/VelvetJustice, who is quite possibly the worst case of a narcissistic power-tripper I've ever encountered on Reddit (and I've dealt with senior /r/science mods). Not in volume, sure, but in sheer gall.

Our story this time begins with this comment chain (yes, that's an archive of ceddit; bypasses the need to run Javascript and accept an outdated certificate. For reference, here is the OP.) As you can see, I've been u-pinged into a thread that I might have completely missed (other subreddits these days keep me too busy to pay much attention to /r/Canada), by the very well-meaning /u/Celda. Also as you can see, this is far from the first time that users of /r/Canada have had a complaint about the moderation.

I want to take a break here to emphasize that Celda is quite possibly the overall nicest Redditor I've ever met, and both of us have been here for quite a long time. I mean, I've met a lot of other Redditors who were merely very mild-mannered and willing to see the good in people they disagreed with. But the way this guy doesn't even get the slightest bit bothered when a moderator accuses him of complete bullshit is nothing short of superhuman. Also note that, contra VelvetJustice's claims, Celda is perfectly capable of having a productive discussion with other mods. So it's clear that Celda isn't the problem here.

It should also be understood that there is obvious political friction between the two of them. VelvetJustice's politics are, IMHO, best summed up with the observation that he consistently uses singular-they pronouns for other people even when their genders are known. Celda, OTOH, is an MRA. It writes itself.

Anyway, notice how VelvetJustice starts out by referring to "members of the Moderating Team" as a single entity, refusing to accept personal responsibility. When called out on provable, previous actions, he characterizes this as "personal attacks" and "offensive accusations", and leads off with a formal warning and a formal reminder of the rules in a context where the rules are already being discussed. He repeatedly blatantly insults Celda by throwing around terms like "conspiracy" based on absolutely nothing (say what you will about conspiracy theories; it's clearly intended as an insult when used by ordinary people), and by describing him as being unwilling or unable to read and understand the rules - while they are in the middle of an argument that could only be possible if that had already happened.

VelvetJustice refuses to accept any personal criticism, and keeps acting as if people couldn't possibly know he was the one to take a particular moderator action, even when it's obvious, or even when he's admitted to it (the same basis he uses for recognizing my purported "abuse" of the report system). The "conspiracy" nonsense is something he was throwing around the last time I got upset, too. He can't just not reply to criticism; he has to interpret even the most politely phrased criticism as a personal attack, while insulting others as unwilling or unable to comply with rules simply because they disagree with the interpretation.

So what happens when I call him out on that (removed comment in the thread, and explanatory note to /r/Canada modmail (screencap))?

• My comment is removed for "abuse of the reporting function" (the one in which I note that I have reported his rude and hostile comments for rudeness and hostility)

• I get banned for 21 days (the next tier up on their ban tier structure, which you only find out about by getting banned or talking to someone else who has - it's not mentioned anywhere in their rules)

• I get muted (of course)

• I get the following note:

You have been banned from /Canada for abusing the reporting function. Furthermore, since this is not the first time you have been caught openly abusing the reporting function, your post has been reported to reddit admins.

Your personal vendetta against one of our moderators has been noted. If you choose to continue to violate the rules upon your return, either by engaging in personal attacks against any other posters, or any further abuse of our Modmail and/or reporting function, you may find yourself permanently banned from this subreddit.

All of this done in messages from the subreddit rather than VelvetJustice himself. Of course. "Plausible" deniability.

(Where it says "this is not the first time", the "first time" is IIRC in connection to the incident Celda mentioned to u-ping me in the first place. I can probably dig up details on that if anyone still cares.)

---

This is the official statement in the /r/Canada rules regarding "moderator transparency":

We will do our best to communicate with people when taking action on a thread or posts so that the people involved might better understand our reasoning for those actions. A lot of drama can probably be avoided by doing so.

Please understand that we are just as human as everyone else. Sometimes we make mistakes, and sometimes we unintentionally let our own biases interfere with our decisions, but we'll try to minimize those occurrences. Also understand that we might not be able to respond immediately, as all of us do have personal lives and work which might prevent us from responding as quickly as you would like. Sorry about that. We will try our best.

Feel free to try to reconcile that with the evidence available to you.