I'm curious when peeps will finally stop contriving arguments for justifying the introduction of the Banned rank? Is there really anyone interested if some user got a permaban a month ago? What would be the purpose of that if that user is no longer able to post thanks to the ban anyway?
The idea is to save time and avoid uncertainty. I could say that a fair % of reports that I get via PM have already been handled (i.e. banned). Not only does this waste my own time, but also the time of the person that wrote up the report (unless they are the first one to catch the violator). I'm certain that this happens to other moderators as well.
The main argument in favor of adding this ugly rank seems to help catch copy-pasters, but if an alleged scofflaw hasn't been posting for a week or longer, aren't we already there?
It applies for different kinds of violations. There are plenty of people who are contributing (specifically reporting) to the forum and in favor of this. I don't see why we should listen to the non contributors (does this include you?), since it doesn't really affect them. It would be easier to find ban evading alts for the people looking into that, but that's another story.
In respect to making longer logs, what prevents the agents of justice and masters of destinies from copying this log daily?
Nothing. This is a question for botany, as I don't have a stance on the log.
