A tired arguement I know, and I apoligize for bringing it up again. But to this point, i'm sure you've only heard MimeSong and Advocate's point of views.

To get the main point out of the way, I think that Advocate's demodding was unjustly done. Advocate's actions, when wrong, were apoligized for; However, there is no where in the forum implicitly stating that moderator's must conduct themselves in a manner different than any other member. Understandbly, we are setting an example, and there are things we can't say just like other's can't, but simply because we are moderators does not mean we can't voice our opinion about things if it varies from the rest of the Moderator's opinions.

Advocate's post, containing nothing more than "Die.", has been brought up so often i'm sure it needs no more introduction.

I have the PM's between Advocate and MimeSong (with permission from both). Advocate has repeatedly stipulated that what he said crossed the border of what even a regular member could say. He has not only retracted that comment, he's apoligized for it many a time. I don't think it should, at this point, be attributed to the situation any more than it already has. Advocate would have post it at the time whether he was a Moderator or not, and retracted/apoligized in the same manner.

The incident where Advocate removed Giovanni's RM2k3 screenshots from the Screenshots thread, is a better example against Advocate than the "Die." comment. However, it was never implicitly stated that both RM2k3 and RMXP screenshots were allowed in that post, and it was my understanding as well as Advocate's that since it was in the RMXP section of an RMXP forum, it was not allowed. The comment he left originally, from what I know, was harsh. But, as often as I am on the forum, it was removed so fast that even I never saw it. Again, Advocate has realized his error and made the appropriate apoligies, even though the rule he broke was stated after the fact.

This brings me to the last incident I am qualified to talk about, which is, the IRC Channel incident. I was a big part of that. Again, the actions we took in the channel predated the rule against such actions (posted August 27th). How is it we are expected to follow rules which are not clearly stated. I'm sure you can understand why we would not automatically assume we can't act up in the "Fun and Non-Serious IRC Channel" as those who were against our actions often claimed. As a result, in fear of losing association to RMXP.net, i've employed rules in the channel befitting the Forum. So far, it seems most members of the channel are against it.. so.. Why does everyone want it both ways I wonder.. Anyhow, I digress. Again, the actions we took in the IRC channel were not only inaccordance to the rules and guidelines of the forum (as is expected of us now), but were also unaware to us against these unwritten rules that MimeSong seems to think we know.

So in short, in some manner of action without discreditting MimeSong's judgement, I feel Advocate's moderatorship needs to be reinstated. While he did take actions that were against the standards set by MimeSong as to how a moderator should act, the majority of the arguements against him appeared after the fact and he should not be held accountable for them.