The words were, "merits discussion." Any poster at any time has the right to air his concerns about the actions and qualifications of a particular moderator, and to propose whatever solutions or interventions he deems fit - in the appropriate forum. Remi can read those, decide for himself whether or not to investigate, decide for himself whether or not to intervene, and - should he intervene - decide for himself whether to adopt some, all, or none of the poster's ideas.

However, do not invest such a discussion with more power than it actually has. This is Remi's sandbox, and all decisions - save only your decision to participate or not to participate - are ultimately his and his alone.

DW can attest that he has raised many a complaint about Frank - most over in Censorship, if I recall. Clearly that has never resulted in Frank's removal, and if Remi ever discussed the issues with Frank, that was a private matter between Remi and Frank.

Do not expect an act of contrition. Skeptic disagrees with you sharply. By his words, he clearly has little respect for you or your methods, and he very clearly sees nothing wrong in his behavior. Expecting contrition in the absence of insight on his part is not logical - it's your anger speaking, seeking vindication where no real hope of vindication exists. The best that can be hoped is that, in the face of the community's disapproval of his behavior, he might moderate future behavior out of respect for the opinion of the community as a whole.