[Im A Bald Eagle]

I believe the spirit of the rule is clear, and I support its enforcement when applied appropriately. For example, about an hour before my ban, someone else was banned for making genuinely deranged and inappropriate comments about liking younger people. That was the correct application of the rule.

In my case, however, I made a lighthearted comment referencing an American financier known to have connections in Hollywood. I didn’t say anything about what or who Pancakes likes, nor did I make any inappropriate or suggestive remarks. It feels like a significant reach to ban me for joking about someone knowing someone else. Many well-known people had ties to Epstein, and mentioning his name isn’t inherently a violation.

If this enforcement is deemed correct, I think the rules should be updated to provide clearer guidelines. I was aware of the rules when I made the comment and genuinely didn’t think it violated them.

I think adding additional clarification to the rules (even something as simple as stating that there is ZERO tolerance here) is a reasonable request. That being said, the precedent of enforcement here would generally lead to a warn, context independent. 

You should've known better either way considering it's only been ~a week since the last time you were verbally warned for the same thing. Just ride out the ban and avoid making the same mistake moving forward.