Banning members: Poll

[mook]

If a poster pretty much complies with community standards, but engages in behavior that a certain percent of the forum finds obnoxious and a major distraction to the board, do you think it would be a good idea to ban that member?

I've really got no strong opinion one way or the other myself. But I'm curious about what people think.

I'm not intending this thread as a personal attack. More of a barometer of what people think would be done if it was their own board to manage. Hopefully the mods allow it.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I am not a witch!

 

[mook]

I am not a witch!

LMAO!

 

[chris_in_pdx]

Careful, this thread will get you threatened with suspension after it's been deleted.

 

[maxiep]

I believe in free speech. I don't mind when people troll; it lets me know all I need about that person.

 

[barfo]

I think one member should be banned daily, chosen by random drawing.

barfo

 

[mook]

I think one member should be banned daily, chosen by random drawing.

barfo

....

 

[Denny Crane]

Careful, this thread will get you threatened with suspension after it's been deleted.

I don't think so.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I think one member should be banned daily, chosen by random drawing.

barfo

I'm SlyPokerDog and I approve this message.

 

[44Thrilla]

if an overwhelming majority of people support a ban, they should definitely be banned.

 

[Jayps15]

I'd be in favor of giving the community a tool to police itself with, Denny has said that this is supposed to be a user centered or community/user shaped experience. Make it something like a ballot initiative, a certain number of posters (25-30) make a petition to have a disruptive influence removed from the community and it gets put to a vote for the community that wants them gone from, so if the blazers board wants to ban someone only ban them from that specific board but only allow those community members to vote. Make it a 1 month ban for the 1st offense and a lifetime ban if they don't come back with better behavior and something like 6 months before someone can be put up for banning again if they aren't voted out the 1st time.

This isn't an entirely public forum, you have to register and post by certain (loose) rules to continue to have the privilege to post here, I don't believe having the ability to post here gives you the right to act however you want other users be damned.

 

[Denny Crane]

I'd be in favor of giving the community a tool to police itself with, Denny has said that this is supposed to be a user centered or community/user shaped experience. Make it something like a ballot initiative, a certain number of posters (25-30) make a petition to have a disruptive influence removed from the community and it gets put to a vote, make it a 1 month ban for the 1st offense and a lifetime ban if they don't come back with better behavior and something like 6 months before someone can be put up for banning again if they aren't voted out the 1st time.

This isn't an entirely public forum, you have to register and post by certain (loose) rules to continue to have the privilege to post here, I don't believe having the ability to post here gives you the right to act however you want other users be damned.

I haven't closed this thread, nor have I discouraged anyone from participating. It's not particularly about a poster (nobody's been specified), and I hope it stays that way and on the topic of the poll. I have some feedback about the concept, but I'd rather see how the poll works out before speaking on that.

We've been quite open about how we run things here and the reasoning behind the rules. We've been as democratic as possible, and a poll sure seems democratic.

Carry on.

 

[blazerboy30]

I've been asking Denny to just clearly state that trolls won't be banned. Then we can just move on and find a reasonable way to deal with those types of posters.

But, instead, he keeps taking the cowardly way out and won't take a stance. So instead this garbage continues.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I haven't closed this thread, nor have I discouraged anyone from participating. It's not particularly about a poster (nobody's been specified), and I hope it stays that way and on the topic of the poll. I have some feedback about the concept, but I'd rather see how the poll works out before speaking on that.

We've been quite open about how we run things here and the reasoning behind the rules. We've been as democratic as possible, and a poll sure seems democratic.

Carry on.

We all know it's about me.

 

[44Thrilla]

I've been asking Denny to just clearly state that trolls won't be banned. Then we can just move on and find a reasonable way to deal with those types of posters.

But, instead, he keeps taking the cowardly way out and won't take a stance. So instead this garbage continues.

Denny is definitely not the one to blame. IMO, he would have no problem banning somebody without honorable intentions. In fact, he's done it before.

 

[mook]

I've been asking Denny to just clearly state that trolls won't be banned. Then we can just move on and find a reasonable way to deal with those types of posters.

But, instead, he keeps taking the cowardly way out and won't take a stance. So instead this garbage continues.

I don't think it's cowardly. The rules as they are right now basically make it clear that a troll shouldn't be banned, provided he trolls politely.

I'm asking if there needs to be a secondary mechanism, a sort of amendment to the constitution. I'll call it "The Asshole Amendment." It's just designed to elevate the whole discussion of the board by removing the distraction.

I'm somewhat conflicted on the issue myself. On one hand, I really don't give a fuck about trolls. They only succeed when they get in your head. So don't feed them attention.

On the other hand, I realize a number of high quality posters here are bothered by trolling. It makes them less inclined to post here, and derails them from more interesting lines of analysis. So in a roundabout way the troll is damaging my experience here, and there's nothing I can do about it.

I do enjoy a little of the comedy that's created at times, but I don't think it outweighs the negatives for me. So I guess I'd vote for the 51% option out of pure self-interest.

Unfortunately, I already voted "No," so it's moot in my case.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

I've been asking Denny to just clearly state that trolls won't be banned. Then we can just move on and find a reasonable way to deal with those types of posters.

I can be bought off for a $20 Starbucks gift card.

 

[andalusian]

I do not think the community has the right to ban a member. It would be nice however to be able to suspend them for a little while when their trolling gets out of whack.

 

[Wheels]

I do not think the community has the right to ban a member. It would be nice however to be able to suspend them for a little while when their trolling gets out of whack.

this

 

[HailBlazers]

Sorry Mods Can't Vote! Only Mod.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I recently placed 3 people who seem to do nothing but agitate on "ignore". Amazing how peaceful this place has become since then.

 

[Wheels]

lol I didnt vote dont worry. But FWIW I think that %'s of voters ganging together in an angry mob to get someone banned is a slippery slope. A whole lot of politics could/would happen. Then you start having these really annoying cliques that form. Dont make me choose between the Capulets and the Montagues please!!!

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

lol I didnt vote dont worry. But FWIW I think that %'s of voters ganging together in an angry mob to get someone banned is a slippery slope. A whole lot of politics could/would happen. Then you start having these really annoying cliques that form. Dont make me choose between the Capulets and the Montagues please!!!

I tried placing a mod on "ignore", but found it couldn't be done.

 

[Wheels]

I tried placing a mod on "ignore", but found it couldn't be done.

lol gee thanks

 

[mook]

lol I didnt vote dont worry. But FWIW I think that %'s of voters ganging together in an angry mob to get someone banned is a slippery slope. A whole lot of politics could/would happen. Then you start having these really annoying cliques that form. Dont make me choose between the Capulets and the Montagues please!!!

Whack! Get out!

 

[mook]

I demand that a mod add a pitchfork and a torch to the "mook" emoticon or there will be some serious-ass rabble-rabble going on here.

 

[mook]

 

[blazerboy30]

I don't think it's cowardly. The rules as they are right now basically make it clear that a troll shouldn't be banned, provided he trolls politely.

I'm asking if there needs to be a secondary mechanism, a sort of amendment to the constitution. I'll call it "The Asshole Amendment." It's just designed to elevate the whole discussion of the board by removing the distraction.

I'm somewhat conflicted on the issue myself. On one hand, I really don't give a fuck about trolls. They only succeed when they get in your head. So don't feed them attention.

On the other hand, I realize a number of high quality posters here are bothered by trolling. It makes them less inclined to post here, and derails them from more interesting lines of analysis. So in a roundabout way the troll is damaging my experience here, and there's nothing I can do about it.

I do enjoy a little of the comedy that's created at times, but I don't think it outweighs the negatives for me. So I guess I'd vote for the 51% option out of pure self-interest.

Unfortunately, I already voted "No," so it's moot in my case.

The problem with the "I don't care about trolls" statement is that it isn't that simple. I have NO problem ignoring a certain Troll's posts. The problem is that if EVERYBODY doesn't do the same, the entire discussion gets completely derailed and now I have to skip the entire thread and discussion instead of a single poster's posts.

It is a lot easier to try to fix the actions of a single poster than try to change the actions of everybody else. And if everybody else doesn't ignore the troll, then he has succeeded at screwing up the experience for those who really were ignoring him.

 

[mook]

The problem with the "I don't care about trolls" statement is that it isn't that simple. I have NO problem ignoring a certain Troll's posts. The problem is that if EVERYBODY doesn't do the same, the entire discussion gets completely derailed and now I have to skip the entire thread and discussion instead of a single poster's posts.

It is a lot easier to try to fix the actions of a single poster than try to change the actions of everybody else. And if everybody else doesn't ignore the troll, then he has succeeded at screwing up the experience for those who really were ignoring him.

If you read my post, you'll find I came to pretty much the same conclusion.

 

[Denny Crane]

I edited the poll to reflect mook's change of mind. I really don't want to keep changing votes though.