Re: Misapplication of GB COCK, Code Duello, and Moderator Review ObligationsThe Committee™’s invocation of the Get Big Code of Conduct Keystones (GB COCK) and Code Duello is inconsistent with its own precedent.GB COCK §2.3(b) (rev. March 2025) draws a bright-line distinction between poster-to-poster disputes and competence reviews of authority holders. The latter are expressly excluded from adversarial or performative resolution mechanisms. This principle was reaffirmed in Hankins v. Josh (Committee Findings, May 2024), where the Committee™ held that “no amount of rhetorical victory cures structural incompetence.”Similarly, the Committee™’s post-mortem on the OneMoreRep v. SuckMyMuscle War (2012–2013) concluded that escalation frameworks are containment tools, not substitutes for judgment—particularly where one party benefits from institutional protection. That finding was later cited in Memorandum 18-02 (January 2018) cautioning against “spectacle-driven avoidance of substantive review.”The present matter concerns moderator fitness, not interpersonal grievance. Suggesting Code Duello as a remedy is therefore contrary to settled practice.Further, the Committee™ should be mindful of its own guidance in Advisory Note 20-07 (June 2024) regarding conflicts of interest. That advisory arose in part from concerns that GrapeApe had leveraged Committee™ authority in disputes tangentially involving French Toast-related enforcement, creating at minimum the appearance of personal benefit influencing procedural outcomes. While no formal finding was issued, the Committee™ acknowledged that even perceived self-dealing erodes institutional credibility.Finally, the Committee™’s attempt to diffuse the issue through humor mirrors its rejected approach in Chaos Review Addendum (August 2015), where the Committee™ acknowledged that physical distractions—including, memorably, Chaos’s cankles—were irrelevant to assessing whether authority was exercised competently.If the Committee™ has abandoned these standards, it should state so explicitly. Otherwise, continued reliance on deflection constitutes a refusal to apply the GB COCK as written.
Re: Vegan Gains on gear
