See, what really got myself and a lot of other people up in arms was This Post by Michael Morris, which directly contradicts what you are telling us here.
You are not being punished for revealing the weaknesses of the system. You are not being punished for cheating. You are being punished for holding the awards process in contempt, for encouraging cheating, for debasing and udevaluing both the awards and the process by which they are derived, and for calling into question the integrity of the awards.
At this point it's hard to know what to believe.
Why is it hard to know what to believe? Is it because the world is never as it seems at first glance? In life don't enemies sometimes turn out to be friends and friends to be enemies? Do you believe that speaking plainly never works? Do you believe people read what they want to read and hear what they want to hear and all too often they come away with just that information that upholds and confirms their prior prejudices and convictions? Does it make sense that I might as all good pooka do speak in riddles so that only those willing to reach beyond these all too human faults will understand, and those who are are unwilling walk away befuddled, confused and angry?
What of my statement above made when I'm not playing the trickster Pooka? Isn't it ironic to see that statement twisted far more thoroughly than the riddle-ridden language I use here? Didn't I state FtB was
punished? Don't you think I chose that word carefully and used it very deliberately? Punished. Didn't Denise say the actions of the board were for the cheating? Isn't punishment another thing entirely? Isn't it the result of the actions of the board, and not itself the action of the board? Aren't punishments in whatever form they take scaled not only to actions but to the consequences of the actions? Did I list just the actions or did I list the consequences? Think on it a moment. Think hard.
Isn't cheating the same as "holding the awards process in contempt?" Isn't a consequence of not punishing cheating "encouraging cheating?" Isn't a consequence of cheating "debasing and devaluing both the awards and the process by which they are derived?" And doesn't cheating "call into question the integrity of the awards?" Aren't all of these consequences of the same single act - the same single act that prompted the board's action?
You all are gamers - certainly you've seen where Luke Skywalker tells ObiWan that "Ben, you'll find that many of the truths we cling to come from a certain point of view." So don't you think when I wrote that I was speaking true to
my point of view? How can I speak to another?