And yet a very strong majority of the people who have ever been banned on BitcoinTalk.org have not once criticized a staff member. If I'm understanding you right, that means that we should never ban someone once they criticize one of the staff? Because statistically, only a handful of people have been banned after criticising a staff member out of hundreds of people who have been banned, so you can't say that it's a problem in that sense. Nor are we banning an overly high number of people from the pool of people that criticise us, so that's not an issue, either. So again, you're saying that we just can't ban people period after they criticise the staff because it might be a conflict of interest. So then who does ban them if they do something bad? It can't be another staff member, because you still claim that is a conflict: in both of the recent ban cases (Rarity and Goat), another mod has approved of the ban. So, I guess we give the decision to the people? Well, damn, that doesn't work either, since they both had orange ignore buttons.

So please, tell me, what the hell are we supposed to do in such a situation?