Banning members

[ComSoft6128]

Hi Gryzor (and the other moderators),

This is not specific to the posts from @GUNHED regarding VintageAdvantage but was prompted by them.
Should there by a clear policy of say "three strikes and you're out" on this?
Maybe with bans lasting 3/6/12 months depending on the level of offense caused?

Peter

[pelrun]

What do you even mean by "strikes"? Gryzor has rarely taken action except in egregious cases, and usually when there's been abuse via PM. Just because whatever posts still remain public may not appear to be bad, doesn't mean the action isn't justifiable.
There's no need for official policies, after all this forum is 100% a benevolent dictatorship and the rule has always been pretty consistently "don't be more trouble than you're worth."

[Gryzor]

Morning there!

Not sure what post you're referring to, but it doesn't matter I guess!

I see what you're saying and it does make sense; in effect we are enforcing something of the sort - bans are progressive, and sometimes we implement moderation *before* the first, short ban. However, it's very hard to do a "clear policy", because not one size fits all. How can one judge the levels of offense beforehand so as to lay down the rules?

[Gryzor]

"don't be more trouble than you're worth."

Whoa, this should be in the registration agreement! I'm stealing the quote

Actually, there was a pretty clear policy shown upon registration about being nice to each other and loving trees and being one with nature and all that, strangely it appears it has changed - probably with some software upgrade. Hm.

[ComSoft6128]

Understood.


A Red Card then?

[Gryzor]

Isn't a ban a red card?

Behind the scenes there's a warning system that works kind like yellow and red cards; you can send a warning to a member and set the warning level between 0-100%. Above a certain percentage all the member's posts are moderated (a moderator needs to approve them). That warning level slowly decreases by itself.

However, this system clearly doesn't work with people who don't give a f*ck and openly say so; in those cases incremental bans are usually applied...

[ComSoft6128]

Red card = a public announcement that you are being a knob/making unwelcome personal comments.

[Gryzor]

Ah, but I think we're doing that already?

[Shaun M. Neary]

Red card = a public announcement that you are being a knob/making unwelcome personal comments.

To be honest, in a forum frequented by 40 and 50 somethings. Should that really be necessary?
Personal accountability.

[Gryzor]

To be honest, in a forum frequented by 40 and 50 somethings. Should that really be necessary?
Personal accountability.

You'd think that, wouldn't you.

[ComSoft6128]

It shouldn't be necessary but unfortunately a public Forum will always have the occasional member, that occasionally,  needs a wee public kick in the bum.

[Shaun M. Neary]

It shouldn't be necessary but unfortunately a public Forum will always have the occasional member, that occasionally,  needs a wee public kick in the bum.

And they do... out the door! 

[Gryzor]

I do know a few 40+ assholes to be honest. Also, there's no "INTERNET OFF" switch for when you're drunk or feeling down  etc etc so it's no wonder that people will sometimes will go off the rails.