We'll scale back the complete lid on discussion at some point in the future, it's just a cooldown period. I can't think of any other banned users who were in this weird situation where they kinda made their information public to AHG, but not explicitly on its platforms, so I don't anticipate this to be effective for anyone else. Can't claim something is personal information if you intentionally made it public.
I really don't understand why someone would be comfortable going public without at least trying to get staff to act first. My concern is that public allegations, even if true, run the risk of some completely unqualified people acting as vigilantes and harming potential legal outcomes, allowing the accused to re-offend elsewhere. But look, if someone is an actual victim we're not going to ban them. This section was more addressed to deal with people who weaponize false **** allegations, like this:
I was never a fan of this policy, and I've personally supported every appeal of a legacy COI ban issued for this reason. AHG is not in the business of banning victims, so we would not ban a hypothetical person involved in such a situation.