Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-9062114-20151024212230/@comment-1188343-20151029122400

''I can assure you that almost anyone with a year ban will forget about said wiki, as it says on his talk page. Comparing Sajuuk to an anon who only has a few good edits does not suit the situation, since Sajuuk has made more than a "few" good edits.''

Oh? The example I made is perfect: No one would let an anon run around with an attitude like Sajuuk's, and yet vouch for him because he "makes great edits." Yet, Sajuuk can do it, and only get a small ban?

To quote from a character in Fallout: New Vegas: "A murderer who does good deeds is still a murderer, and he'll still get his judement." - Boone

Sure, he's done good things for the wiki, but should you continue giving him "slaps on the wrist" if his behavior never improves? Just because he's been a "good editor," everyone should let him do as he pleases?