The other reason I support banning him is that to do less, now that we know how his actions have hurt people in our community, seems like a slap in the face to those he has hurt, pissed off, or driven away. And I would much rather support them than keep enabling him.

This. I think this is the most important point.

I will consent or vote to ban him, whatever we need to do.

Can we revise the proposal to something like "Suspend the standard warnings procedure to allow the stompies to immediately ban," which both acknowledges that there is a procedure that we're not following due to the severity of the situation, the the community is behind this choice, and that banning per se is not generally a votable issue?

I like Debet's proposal.

Sure. Revised:

Proposal: Due to a long-term pattern of harassment, suspend the standard warnings procedure to allow the Stompies to ban Polter-Cow from the board immediately.

So we're voting to suspend procedure? (Also, I'm fine with that, just clarifying. I ... did not watch a lot of Law and Order, so.)

Yes, the vote is NOT on the banning, the vote is on the suspension of written procedure in this case, so that banning can be immediate without suspension and yada yada.

I do think we need to follow our own rules, despite viscerally wanting him gone now now now. Dana's revised proposal is appropriate. We'll vote. We'll give the Stompies the authority to immediately ban and we can hope the community heals and valued members return.

I kinda feel like I just got told that that twinge in my knee that I thought was just a thing that happened when a storm was coming is actually a tumor. How could I not have noticed?

Except I know many habits and characteristics I have that would let me not notice. I'm so sorry.

I feel this way too. I'm upset that I never saw it, that I didn't let myself accept the seriousness of what I did see. I'm really sorry, both that we've lost people over this, and that my silence might have in any way contributed to their leaving.

I would vote for Dana's proposal. I feel he's had enough warnings and chances already, and more importantly, if he should return to the board, it would only cause more harm.

I concur with Debet's proposed language.

There's just no part of this that isn't upsetting.

This.

I looked at the Smugglers link and I'm hopping someone can provide some clarification for me. The term "grooming" is used. To my understanding, this is a behavior engaged in by an adult abuser towards a child.

Is this term being used differently than my understanding or is there minor involvement in this long, sad, sordid, saga?