A ban is imposed on a person or an action. It can be rescinded at any time, but remains in place until it is explicitly rescinded. An expiration can be included in the terms of the ban, which automatically rescinds the ban after a set duration. The base definition of “ban” implies nothing about duration. Without clarification, any assumption regarding duration is baseless. Such clarification can be direct, such as including a clear statement of the period for which the ban is in place during the issuance of the ban, or indirect, such as context clues regarding the severity of the infraction that led to the ban being issued.

A suspension is placed upon statuses, privileges, credentials, or the like. Suspension is, by nature, a transitory state. Examples include being suspended from a job pending investigation of behavior, having one’s club membership suspended until club dues are brought current, or having one’s login credentials suspended while one’s account appears to be compromised. The transitory nature of a suspension implies that it resolves upon completion (or inaction on) of a task related to the object of the suspension. Upon completion of the sub-task, status is either reinstated or terminated. In the previous examples: employment is terminated upon conclusion of an investigation that proves the employee acted inappropriately, club membership is reinstated once payment of the outstanding balance is verified, account credentials are reinstated with access limitations once the account owner proves they are in control of the account.

Suspension is a step along the path to termination or revocation, not to a ban. The two terms are not directly related in that way. There can be overlap, but they are not different degrees of the same concept.

That makes assumptions, like that they would have had all the ingredients available or that they would eat enough subs to make buying the ingredients more viable.

Living up to the middle of your username, I see.

that’s a sticky question,

No, the banshee-wailing fuck it isn’t!

If someone truly believes they are in fucking danger, they need to remove themselves from the danger first and foremost, before any consideration of “but what about next election?”

O, to be so proverbially blissful.

I didn’t even realize it didn’t say “boner” until you pointed it out.

I almost feel like I’m being contrarian by asking this, though it isn’t my intent: your alternatives sound great at first blush, but how do you intend that those alternatives are enforced? Does that lead into your estimated >1% of offenders?

Is that supposed to be the strange insult?

Damn, did I touch a nerve?

Sounds like a case of the crayon-eater calling the mouth-breather stupid…

Gathering all the trash to launch it into the sun isn’t easy, as many comments have pointed out. Not only do you have to counteract the velocity of Earth, but I’d expect you’d need a way to keep them alive on the trip there as well. I mean, I’m assuming you want them to be cognizant until the end, yeah?

So when Lord Carnarvon sent Howard Carter into the Valley of the Kings with his team…

…that was the Invasion of the Body Snatchers?

You’d need to limit the capacity to vote on credibility to people who are members of the community. If you haven’t joined, you can’t make a judgment about what is or isn’t a good faith post, but your own post can be voted by members. Rather than being attached to just the user, it would probably be better if it were referenced to the user per community. Even so, it’s essentially karma, and could probably be gamed.

Otherwise, you’ve just reinvented upvotes.

Do you often look out your window and see everything you dream about and wish you had?

Which one of your .ml buddies got banned from a community or instance, why did it inspire you to post such a contrived “question” in this community, and how clever did you convince yourself that your little pet hypothetical was when you hit “send?”

Is joke.

Civ IV was peak Civ for me. The changes made going into V just didn’t feel like Civ.

Yes, that includes the loss of doomstacks.

Mine flails typically reverse over minefields by design for that very reason, so I interpreted this one as doing the same. If not, then yes, driving across the field with the contraption behind the truck would be a short, joyless trip.

Non-credible. Purpose-built mine flails are on the borderline of credibility already. In this configuration, you’d need at least a class IV hitch to handle the tongue weight, probably a class V when you factor in the force imparted by the motion of the flail. That’s not even taking into account how much power is needed to properly swing the chains with enough impact to detonate a significant portion of the mines.

And if there happens to be an AT mine or two in the mix, the whole ill-advised experiment becomes an unappealing art installation.

That’s a section of track where the break has been found and documented. At the very least, significant damage that is suspected to be related to sabotage would require additional thorough inspection of the surrounding railway.