With respect Danzar, I don't see how S.S. Bleeder contravened the rules in the 'Recent user bans' thread. You there write "I don't want you to think that you cannot challenge another member's position, in fact, I encourage it. Just do it with respect, no matter how strong your feelings." In your sign off you write, "If history is written by the victors, as some people say, then I believe we should question everything." Now you are saying S.S. Bleeder questioning your decision is "opposition" to be "called out" even though his protest didn't interfere with the outcome and, at least to me, it didn't seem particularly disrespectful except to the extent that it expressed a different point of view. I think his protest is in line with the policy you have indicated we should follow and that's why I expressed my concern when you called him out.
Also, I am unclear what it means when you write "this is not a moderator decision. You should know that I do not get involved in a lot of the discussion that occurs on here; for now I own RWO". What does this mean? Does it mean:
(a) you own this website; and
(b) you generally leave the moderating to the other users with "site admin" on their profile (like liz, Meg, ugg, ScottH) but occasionally step in and have final say about what goes and what doesn't when you feel it necessary?
It is helpful to understand how this site is governed to understand how I can and should post here. Assuming what I have understood is correct, I didn't know it until now. I didn't realise this was a privately owned website and that you were the owner. I take this moment to express my appreciation to you for creating this space. I certainly enjoy coming here to read, post and share thoughts about the Swans etc. It also explains why you are calling the shots.
Bookmarks