Thanks for your response. I don't think Karin was suggesting that he should be treated differently because he's funny/popular, but that he does not deserve such a long ban because he hasn't demonstrated himself to be an offensive poster who contributes nothing to the 1% of serious tennis discussion that goes on in GM. In other words, he's a good poster with sharp insights on the sport that this forum is dedicated to, and on that account he should be differentiated from the usual trollish double accounts that get a 3 month ban
Regardless of what Karin meant, lifting or changing the ban means treating one poster differently than others.
While I totally understand your slippery slope concern, the punishment imposed by the mods for rules-breaking also have to be fair. Fairness is contingent also upon the particular circumstances of the individual case, not just a uniform application of the rules; the punishment, in other words, has to befit the crime. In this case, compared to the other users who were/are banned for the same broken rule, banning him for 3 months really is too excessive.
I agree that circumstances and individuals should sometimes be considered, but this type of treatment is better suited for contexts where resources are available for such considerations. Unfortunately we don't have the time and resources to make the same considerations in each and every single case. Don't forget, if we were to do this for Leng jai, we would have to take the time to review the history and "posting skills" of each and every member for each and every infraction.
Even if we had the time to do this (and believe me, we don't), one of the undesired effects of such an approach would be to give members the impression that as long as they are good posters, or popular or whatever, they may get away with certain things. This is not what we hope to achieve from having rules.
Again, I can understand that people don't want to see Leng jai banned. But don't forget that Leng jai knew what he was doing and what consequences he would face. But he chose deliberately to disregard the rules and created a double account anyway.
And now we have to show leniency because he's a "sharp poster"? I'm not sure that's a good enough reason.
Anyhow, like I said, I'll discuss this with others to see what can be done.