One of us was staunchly in the "This is Eve. HTFU" camp The other was ready to ban the user from the first report.

We realized that this would be an examination onto the changing culture of Eve. Would people confront this user directly? Or would everyone come to the moderators immediately asking them to be banned?

Seeing as one of us was about to go in for a medical procedure, and the other of us had just started a new job, we wouldn't have much time for moderation this week anyways. An experiment was designed. In the week we were both away, we would allow EJTruthInAdvertising to continue without moderation. The other component was that we came to a simple and elegant solution for those who did not like his content: all people would have to do is ask EJTruthInAdvertising to stop. Directly. Maturely.

EJTruthInAdvertising agreed to this without hesitation.

The moderators have returned. After one week, We now can see which one of us was right. You all come to us moderators begging for u/EJTruthInAdvertising to be banned. You fill our modqueue and you make posts complaining, and stage civil disobedience against us rather than, even once, attempting to confront the "problem" in a direct manner.

What's interesting is we've gotten feedback from both sides. People using r/evejobs for recruitment, claiming this user is slandering their good name and people using r/evejobs to corporation search, claiming this user is shedding light, albeit cynically, on posts and making them better at looking for corporations in the process.

After the first reports started coming in, one of us asked the following to the other:

    What do we do? I, personally, do not agree with it as regardless of the accuracy of the comments, if it being viewed as "trash talk" or "infighting" at all, the site loses legitimacy.

And the other replied with

    I find [EJTruthInAdvertising] amusing, but I also played Eve in the heyday of the HTFU Eve, which is long gone.

Honestly, now that the week has past, I cannot say I'm surprised with the outcome. After reviewing EJTruthInAdvertising's posts, there was a good mix of positive and negative. What there was definitely a lot of was criticism. Criticism that maybe recruiters didn't want to face. They attacked the person holding the spotlight, rather than attempting to talk about what they were doing to make their corporations better or why the criticism (not the critic) was wrong.

Upon return, in order to quell the near-uprising we have on our hands. Rather than banning the user, we simply giving each recruiter the option of simply maturely asking EJTruthInAdvertising to stop posting on their recruitment posts. This will be a per-user request, so corporations with more than one active submitted may require a few times to cover each recruiter.

This is a result of a compromise between the two very different moderators' viewpoints mentioned earlier. One still believes EJTruthInAdvertising is providing a good service. The other wants to avoid conflict.

We do feel it's important to request, if you ask EJTruthInAdvertising to stop, think about why. Is there a part of your corporation that maybe could benefit from some work? Are you, in fact, being honest with your prospective members? Maybe your corporation was an indy group and your killboard didn't remotely matter? Whatever it is, just think about it for a moment.

If, after asking EJTruthInAdvertising to stop in a mature manner, they continue posting on your recruitment ads, do let us know, and it will be handled as usual according to rule #1.

Edit below

Addendum: We are still actively discussing what is allowed and what is not when it comes to "infighting" or "trashtalk" and, there may be a time in the future when a similar concept returns, as a sanctioned part of this subreddit, in some form. More information will be made available if we decide to proceed