Suggestion Bannings...

[The Chairman]

OK gang... give me some input.

What should (if anything) warrant a temp ban (5 day suspension)?

What should (if anything) warrant a perm ban?

 

[Big-t-2538]

OK gang... give me some input.

What should (if anything) warrant a temp ban (5 day suspension)?

What should (if anything) warrant a perm ban?

O.K...since this has drawn out a few pages now (some useful info, and some not-so-useful info)....I'm going to get back to answering the original question...

1 - Anything that violates the TOS...or anyone who persistently posts with the intention of aggrevating the general membersip.

2 - Anything that would be an "automatic boot", these would be IMO

• Creating Sock Puppets
• Posting Pornography
• Any physical or sexaul threats

In addition to this, I would add the Three strikes rule...you can get "temporarily" banned twice...but the thrid time, you're gone for good.

 

[The Chairman]

It was suggested early on that we have a time limit for using temp bans as a reason to perm ban (3 in six months, etc). Do you feel that this is fair, or should we have the "three strike rule" an open ended thing... ie non-expiring.

 

[Big-t-2538]

I feel if you're the type of person getting banned on a repetitive basis...you're doing it rather frequently anyway....sort of relevant to a DUI offender.

However, there is the exception to the rule...for instance, if this board is run for say 6 years, and someone gets in a pissing match with someone new every 2 years, etc., and gets banned, you have to look at circumstances...that's why we have the mods around.

Frankly, I feel 6 months is too short of a timeframe, if you want one, I'd say at least a year, but I'm not big on timeframes with respect to violation of TOS.

 

[Walter]

A flat 3 strikes makes no sense. If someone has some unrelated issues that earn him a couple of suspensions then keeps his nose clean for a couple of years, why should the 3rd time be for life?

 

[The Chairman]

Actually Walter,

our current thinking is that we can reconsider any decision at any time.

Big-T

Yes the moderators do an incredible job of using discretion and looking at extenuating circumstances.

 

[Big-t-2538]

A flat 3 strikes makes no sense. If someone has some unrelated issues that earn him a couple of suspensions then keeps his nose clean for a couple of years, why should the 3rd time be for life?

I say again....

someone gets in a pissing match with someone new every 2 years, etc., and gets banned, you have to look at circumstances...that's why we have the mods around

I agree that there will be the occasional member who racks up 3 & 4 suspensions wihtout the need for a permanent ban, but I don't see the usefulness of such a short timeframe. I mean 6 months or even a year invites people to be "biding their time" before they can be an ass again.

 

[cornfed]

A flat 3 strikes makes no sense. If someone has some unrelated issues that earn him a couple of suspensions then keeps his nose clean for a couple of years, why should the 3rd time be for life?

Agreed. I think x suspensions in y span of time is much better. It allows people to make mistakes, learn from them and move on while still dealing with people who show a regular and consitant lack of willingness to play by the rules.

 

[cornfed]

our current thinking is that we can reconsider any decision at any time.

And a fine line of thinking that is!

 

[Walter]

Pete,

I'm painfully aware of that.

 

[MikeS]

First off, you can’t really ban people; all you can do is restrict IP addresses and delete users. I have plenty of IP addresses and can easily get more unless you’re prepared to block all of Comcast, AOL, Earthlink, etc., etc.

I don’t think allowing a certain number of temporary bans is a good idea. It will only encourage some to push the limit, knowing that they won’t be permanently banned, to build a “bad boy” persona.

If you receive a warning, continue questionable behavior to get temporary banned and persist in the same behavior once you’re reinstated, then you’re probably never going to get with the program.

If I could change anything it would be to eliminate moderating activates under a regular user ID and eliminate participation in a regular discussion as a moderator. This would reduce the perception of biased moderating. Give each moderator a separate moderator ID.

Mike