They get their retribution for speaking a little too freely, and they get to send a message that anyone who is critical of them pays consequences for their actions. It is not moot at all!
What consequences? Any nutjob can create a pointless thread about anything, like you do incessantly about posts that aren't deleted to your liking. Are those threads supposed to be your retribution against users speaking too freely?
The only thing that may have consequences for hacker1001101001 is his continuing lies.
This... as if you don't know I am responding directly to your quote.
...However it would likely be a temporary ban anyway so the point of the OP is kinda moot.
Ah, this is one of those things where you're explaining to other people that the meaning of their posts is the opposite of what the actual words say.
If hacker1001101001's posts violate rules they should be reported and if he deserves a temp-ban because of that - he should get it (or maybe get "time served" if the moderators are so inclined). Not because someone posted a wall of text arguing for double jeopardy. Which part of this is too complicated for you?
No, it is one of those things where I respond to a direct question from you as far as what the consequences of these retribution based peanut hunts would be. What you meant is irrelevant, unless that is, you are trying to say your words didn't mean that he could receive a temporary ban. None of the information presented is even conclusive, not that it stops you and your clown friends from trying to manufacture a self serving narrative with peanut fragments and duct tape.