Member banned

[a447]

and make it all seem a little more above board......

Read the rules.

Moderation and Sanctions

4.3 4.3 A Moderating action or decision may be clearly explained in red within the post or thread concerned. A reference to the rule that has been breached will be included. In the case of loss of posting privileges, the advice will be sent by PM; it will not be delivered publicly.

I'm hoping that it isn't a poster with whom one of the stooges has had a long standing beef.

What took you so long?

If you want to discuss the member in question, I suggest you ask the board owner to suspend the following rule:

4.4 After the explanation has been published or sent by PM, all communication with the member(s) being sanctioned will be by PM or email. There will be no public discussion

[Brad the Impala]

I don't want to "discuss the member in question", I just want to know who you have banned(later revised to one month only).

This doesn't seem an unreasonable question and if you had applied the guideline that you have quoted, 4.3, there would have been a note in red in the offending post that would have enabled us to see who was being banned.

Instead you decided to open a new thread on which others could post, thus rather contradicting your own assertion that Rule 4.4 needs to be suspended before any public discussion could take place.

In fact as seems obvious from the reading of 4.4 that is about communication with the member, and is irrelevant in the context of my simple request to confirm the board name of the person suspended, as has normally been done in the past.