No, scrutiny basically means that the information is available to searching, investigation, examination and so on :) F.ex it might allow you to investigate the events (PMs f.ex) that led to a members permban.

Walls of shame was not what any of us had in mind.

edit :

I'm not sure I understood it :p:

Oh I know, I'm just throwing it in the mix because it needs to be said.
Sometimes things start out one way and then morph into something else. I voice my concerns as I tink of them.

Goddamn you people have alot of time on your hands. Good luck.

If a rule or guideline was to be made, one could write something like : "If there is an inquiry into the details relating to a punitive action between a moderator and a member, details of the incident, including correspondence between the moderator and member relating to the punitive action in question, should be made available for investigation".

That might help a transparency rule work as intended and prevent it being used to make walls of shame and the like.

I missed you so much!

I didn't vote for this option because I'm a deeply private person. I'm not buying this option please stop selling this to me like a witness.

It's an internet forum infraction. Who cares? You just sound paranoid. Stop watching Fox News.

That's Rox News! ;)
And leave her alone; if she wants her privacy she's entitled to it. I wouldn't be crazy about having my dirty laundry out there for all to see. In any case, it's an opinion and a choice, which she's entitled to.

Also: "should be made available for investigation", tore: investigation by who?

I think it should be made illegal to say pointless truisms like this. The entire point of making our opinions public is so that we might compare and contrast them, and even possibly develop new opinions based on our experiences with conversing with others. Otherwise we might as well all just shut the **** up and not say anything to each other.

Stop watching me.