Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

4
  • 14
    @JJJ: Because they don't want the elected moderators on the sites they use to be liable to be sacked & smeared in the press on the whim of an SE bigwig. Commented Oct 27, 2019 at 18:50
  • 2
    @JJJ, I take it the premise of this Q is what to put for people who investigate a profile based on seeing this avatar / username. If someone doesn't know her & doesn't care, I suspect they wouldn't investigate in the first place. If they did anyway out of pure curiosity, it seems incongruous to have something unrelated. Commented Oct 27, 2019 at 18:55
  • I didn't claim it will have any particular impact. I think this is the common-sense answer to this question in the context it was asked. You may feel free to proffer a different answer. Commented Oct 27, 2019 at 19:06
  • 6
    It was a Star Chamber, not a kangaroo court - kangaroos at least pretend to be impartial and "just happen" to come up with their outcome, the star chamber is all done in secret, its way worse WRT justice. I think reinstating Monica would not solve anything, the problem goes deeper. The employee in question needs to be fired IMHO, and a mod needs to be put on the board like a union rep.
    – gbjbaanb
    Commented Oct 27, 2019 at 21:01