There were no rules against downvoting content late, yet this is what you got stuck on instead of acknowledging the proposed tweet changes.

It’s a fair issue to get stuck on. You went radio silent in the face of repeated questions on pending content, in the midst of posting other things. If you still want to characterize this as you ‘not breaking rules which don’t exist,’ instead of acknowledging that content was continually sought to be vetted as soon as possible, it speaks more about your attitude than my own.

Quez had equal full control. You made the active decision to not engage him despite him being a valid path to posting content.

Every time something was ready to Tweet, we tagged every person who had posting abilities in the prompt to post it, including Quez.

Why aren't these platforms micromanaged like Twitter?

Probably because this Twitter account is far older, has a far greater reach, a more accommodating permission delegation system, an exponentially larger following, and thus arguably worthy of far more attention.

Do you maintain similar blackmail portfolios for everyone in Gridcoin?

No. I’m simply talking about how the group discussions we had on Slack are archived and available for reference (and would clear any allegations of my supposed ‘misbehaviour’). I also have no desire to get into a meaningless internet fight; only simply to defend the accuracy of how those discussions are framed.

Actually, that describes my intention behind this whole post pretty well: Ensuring that the information about our Twitter management is accurately covered and represented, so that the community can make an informed decision in going forward. Hopefully these long comment threads can come to an end and the community can make up its mind with this new knowledge in hand.