Notices
Results 1 to 40 of 40
Like Tree17Likes
  • 1 Post By Harold14370
  • 5 Post By KALSTER
  • 1 Post By KALSTER
  • 1 Post By Harold14370
  • 3 Post By marnixR
  • 3 Post By marnixR
  • 1 Post By Boing3000
  • 2 Post By seagypsy

Thread: Ban Log

  1. #1 Ban Log 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Every forum I've ever been on (Excluding the crappy one SciForums uses) maintained a thread as a Ban Log.
    The purpose of the Ban Log is fundamental to forum operation. (I'm surprised you guys went without it so long...)

    The ban log shows:
    -When a member was banned
    -Link to the final offending post along with a descriptive reason for the Ban.
    -Date ban will be lifted- if ever.

    The reason this is fundamental is it's a matter of accountability. I find it very disturbing that I come across members that have been banned- and I have no idea why. I think that the only reason one hasn't seemed necessary so far is that the Mods have a (recent) reputation here for being primarily honest... but trust alone is simply not good enough.

    Please consider creating a Ban Log.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,306
    You mean one you guys can read?

    We have a ban log...not very interesting really....probably about a X00:1 spammers to participating members who got the boot. I might be a look at how much drudgery is involved in keeping this place running :-)


    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Most of them are Mod/admin operated (They type a post in a thread specifically for logging the event) and don't include spammers.

    Drudgery- heard that... A thankless job and one in which many people say, "Hey! Was Girflplitz banned!?"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    The moderators will generally give plenty of warning before banning a member. There aren't any secrets. Though if you haven't followed all the threads, you might wonder why someone was banned.

    I'm not sure we want to emulate other forums, many of which seem to suffer from a lot of politics and drama.

    When you say accountability - how does that work? A member sees that another member has been banned, then they take issue with that and start an argument about it?
    question for you likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    you might wonder why someone was banned.
    Exactly. Who follows every single thread?
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    I'm not sure we want to emulate other forums, many of which seem to suffer from a lot of politics and drama.
    What does that have to do with this?
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    When you say accountability - how does that work?
    Well, you can just ban someone, not say anything... No one knows why... Eventually someone notices that snodgrass has "Suspended" under their name. "Where did that come from?"
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    A member sees that another member has been banned, then they take issue with that and start an argument about it?
    Maybe, but when the ban log shows the post that resulted in a ban, etc, that's much less an issue than suddenly noticing their ban and not knowing why- so asking or even pleading their case.
    Usually, the forums say, "PM the admin to appeal on someones behalf."
    Fostering trust by being open and accountable seems a lot more conducive to less arguments than leaving it mysterious.
    Of course, they take issue and start an argument about it if it's left unaccountable and mysterious.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    4,561
    I like the idea, and wouldnt mind seeing one created.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    We actually have discussed this before. Will take a second look.

    If we were real a-holes, our first log could be: "Neverfly banned for suggesting a ban log".
    pyoko, sculptor, sigurdV and 2 others like this.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Bring it on, ya blowhard.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,306
    Of course, they take issue and start an argument about it if it's left unaccountable and mysterious.
    In the past four or five years, there's been less than a handful of cases like that where other members came to someone's defense. As Harold said, because usually there's been multiple warnings to that member so I-friends following their thread would already know "why" their partner got the boot.

    That being said, it's not a bad idea.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    How odd.

    The only benefit to this is that you can look up somebodies disciplinary record and then use it against them in a connversation. What else?

    If one can't win an argument without digging into somebodies previous then one should give up arguing with them. Thats the kind of dirty tactic we have come to expect from the media when they want to paint somebody as a villian. The Science Forum would be taking a step backwards if it adopted this policy.

    What are the benefits of a ban list? What gives others a right to see it?

    A user should get a warning and or explaination plus a hearing before they are banned... but after that, what good is a public list to anybody?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    How odd.

    The only benefit to this is that you can look up somebodies disciplinary record and then use it against them in a connversation. What else?

    If one can't win an argument without digging into somebodies previous then one should give up arguing with them. Thats the kind of dirty tactic we have come to expect from the media when they want to paint somebody as a villian. The Science Forum would be taking a step backwards if it adopted this policy.

    What are the benefits of a ban list? What gives others a right to see it?

    A user should get a warning and or explaination plus a hearing before they are banned... but after that, what good is a public list to anybody?
    Well, you can learn a lot form any social group by visiting the top 1% and the bottom 1%, the two smallest tip of the bell curves. Saves time.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    How odd.

    The only benefit to this is that you can look up somebodies disciplinary record and then use it against them in a connversation. What else?

    If one can't win an argument without digging into somebodies previous then one should give up arguing with them. Thats the kind of dirty tactic we have come to expect from the media when they want to paint somebody as a villian. The Science Forum would be taking a step backwards if it adopted this policy.

    What are the benefits of a ban list? What gives others a right to see it?

    A user should get a warning and or explaination plus a hearing before they are banned... but after that, what good is a public list to anybody?
    If there is a ban log, it will solely be in a spirit of clarity and openness and the thread will be permanently closed (only mods can post). There will never be an occasion for a hearing though. A non-spammer that gets banned rarely happens in a vacuum. Generally permanent bans are discussed before hand. Despite what some might think, we don't take banning someone lightly.
    Neverfly likes this.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by question for you View Post
    How odd.

    The only benefit to this is that you can look up somebodies disciplinary record and then use it against them in a connversation. What else?

    If one can't win an argument without digging into somebodies previous then one should give up arguing with them. Thats the kind of dirty tactic we have come to expect from the media when they want to paint somebody as a villian. The Science Forum would be taking a step backwards if it adopted this policy.

    What are the benefits of a ban list? What gives others a right to see it?

    A user should get a warning and or explaination plus a hearing before they are banned... but after that, what good is a public list to anybody?
    I agree with QFY. I think it would be a distraction. Anything that takes the focus off the science discussion and puts it on personalities is a bad idea.

    If a member thinks they have been unfairly banned, they usually come back as a sock puppet anyway. Then it becomes a matter of public discussion, until we have to ban them again.
    epidecus likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    4,561
    I think its more annoying to have to search through a members posts to try to find that reason that someone i was having a reasonable discussion with on one has suddenly been banned. I do not visit and read every single thread on the forum, and i like the idea of a central locked thread with the date, reason, and link for why someone is banned.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Boing3000 View Post
    Well, you can learn a lot form any social group by visiting the top 1% and the bottom 1%, the two smallest tip of the bell curves. Saves time.
    Interesting thought but do you think the top and bottom 1% will be on the ban list?

    I'll be on it, does that make me in the top or bottom 1%?

    Ofcourse we all know the answer to that .
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,907
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    If there is a ban log, it will solely be in a spirit of clarity and openness and the thread will be permanently closed (only mods can post). There will never be an occasion for a hearing though. A non-spammer that gets banned rarely happens in a vacuum. Generally permanent bans are discussed before hand. Despite what some might think, we don't take banning someone lightly.
    Is that just banned members or previously suspended also?

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    I think its more annoying to have to search through a members posts to try to find that reason that someone i was having a reasonable discussion with on one has suddenly been banned. I do not visit and read every single thread on the forum, and i like the idea of a central locked thread with the date, reason, and link for why someone is banned.
    How often has this happened?

    The Admin are able to answer enquiries regarding a users account status I would have thought, if they see fit.

    It is ghastly to advertise banned members in public. Some of the vulgar public houses used to do that.

    Bearing those things in mind, I don't think a central thread is necesary or warrented, personally.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    it doesn't really create a very welcoming feeling if the first you see when visiting a forum is a list of banned members (like SciForums does)
    it's a bit like approaching a walled city and seeing skeletons hanging from the tallest tower - is that really the sort of image we want to display to the world ?
    Lynx_Fox, KALSTER and epidecus like this.
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    I agree with QFY. I think it would be a distraction. Anything that takes the focus off the science discussion and puts it on personalities is a bad idea.
    Harold, I must repeat that I've experienced this on every forum I've ever been on. All of what you and Q4U has not been a problem.
    The purpose is so that members know why certain people have been banned.

    Hopefully, the forum will continue to grow in members. Before long, you won't have the small town community you have here, where everyone knows eachother.
    Quote Originally Posted by marnixR View Post
    it doesn't really create a very welcoming feeling if the first you see when visiting a forum is a list of banned members (like SciForums does)
    it's a bit like approaching a walled city and seeing skeletons hanging from the tallest tower - is that really the sort of image we want to display to the world ?
    I did point out that SciForums is doin' it wrong.

    For example, on another forum, it's a thread that is placed within a subforum and a sticky that only Mods/Admins can post in. You make the log, (reason, link to post/thread, date lifted) and then re-lock the thread.

    It's not about public humiliation and let's be blunt- I'm a liable character for the ban log. In fact... on every other forum I was on the thing several times.

    It's about accountability, which is a very important thing, especially as a forum grows in numbers.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,225
    It's about accountability, which is a very important thing, especially as a forum grows in numbers.
    Long before we get to accountability, we need to be a bit more explicit about who is accountable for what. During a week when I was seriously considering handing in my mod badge (why should I put up with people criticising me for doing an unpaid -mostly tedious - job with no benefit except getting a target painted on my posts?) - I checked on the guidelines a few times. Clearly designed around problems identified at a particular time, not worded suitably to cover any situations or word use not explicitly catered for.

    I wasn't in the mood then to draft better wording - and I've got a world-beating headache right now so I won't be getting started today. But I think a better drafting of guidelines which can be pointed to by moderators during such exchanges and at the point of suspension/banning might be a more productive first step.

    (One obvious one is that thread titles should avoid naming forum members - including the originator, and those that do will have to go through moderation before publication. Mainly because the easy jokey ones will pass moderation, but most others would be better treated as PMs to moderators or other members or they need less excited(?) or self-promoting titles if they're to be opened for general discussion.)
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    We actually have discussed this before. Will take a second look.

    If we were real a-holes, our first log could be: "Neverfly banned for suggesting a ban log".
    Congratulations!
    Best comment of today!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Congratulations!
    Best comment of today!
    If I go down, I'm taking you down with me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    Long before we get to accountability, we need to be a bit more explicit about who is accountable for what. During a week when I was seriously considering handing in my mod badge (why should I put up with people criticising me for doing an unpaid -mostly tedious - job with no benefit except getting a target painted on my posts?) - I checked on the guidelines a few times. Clearly designed around problems identified at a particular time, not worded suitably to cover any situations or word use not explicitly catered for.

    I wasn't in the mood then to draft better wording - and I've got a world-beating headache right now so I won't be getting started today. But I think a better drafting of guidelines which can be pointed to by moderators during such exchanges and at the point of suspension/banning might be a more productive first step.

    (One obvious one is that thread titles should avoid naming forum members - including the originator, and those that do will have to go through moderation before publication. Mainly because the easy jokey ones will pass moderation, but most others would be better treated as PMs to moderators or other members or they need less excited(?) or self-promoting titles if they're to be opened for general discussion.)
    This is a strong argument and difficult to refute.

    But I'm a bit of a fool and will try anyway, because the problem with rules is that they become a slippery slope. You always find you need more and can always justify more.

    A bit of give and take becomes necessary, where the group as a whole will just need to tolerate some dissatisfaction on both sides.

    Now maybe what you mean is better wording for the existing rules. But I still think the same caution must be taken.

    I speak of accountability but I've never seen a forum that needed it so little as this one. I could be wrong. I'm a green nube here.
    But over-all, I've seen the most effective and controlled, even if Human, moderators/Admins here. There's a balance here that is probably doomed to be lost before long. Maybe it's only my perspective.

    But on other forums, I've seen how mods and admins can abuse their powers of modship and justify doing so.

    I've seen how they can avoid that appearance by stepping back too far.

    Here, you're group is active enough in moderation, yet controlled enough, yet human enough. You aren't so controlled that you're uptight. You aren't so relaxed that you're too uneven and unfair. You're human.
    John Galt is catching some heat for telling someone off and normally, I'd be opposed to Galt for that behavior from a Moderator. But I'm not opposed and I agree- because he was allowed to be human without going too far, without being abusive on a regular basis. I think that kind of balance is very important.
    Look at how I've been bickering with Harold, yet I haven't had to confront his position on the forum, we've been confronting eachothers words. I've never seen an admin act that way on other forum and he should be applauded and given the respect due for such steadiness.
    I suspect that this balance won't last forever. It may even be a compliment of characters that will change when the characters change.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,225
    But on other forums, I've seen how mods and admins can abuse their powers of modship and justify doing so.

    I've seen how they can avoid that appearance by stepping back too far.
    I fancy that both bad habits are all too easy to slip into if people behave in the same way as they would when running their own personal blog. Because, capricious though it may be, blog owners are quite within their rights to shape their own personal corner of the web any way they want.

    It's never occurred to me that such an approach would be right here. And I've never seen any signs of the other moderators using their rights as mods to do things like shut down political points of view that oppose their own. Perhaps it helps that we are, in fact, very very different in our backgrounds and views.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Congratulations!
    Best comment of today!
    If I go down, I'm taking you down with me.
    Heh! Man I like you!
    So lets get banned together if it comes to the worst.
    Kalster was uncharacteristically funny there...
    I didnt translate his joke as an insult to you.
    He was sort of making fun of Ignatious Loyola.
    But English is butt my second language...
    its finer nuances may escape me.
    The mods in here ARE somewhat annoying
    but they are NOT trigger happy.
    Your ban list is a good idea
    but it need not be on the front page...Ok?
    Thats my honest opinion, not a sarcasm!
    AND: My best wishes to you. Good Hunting!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    I'm also opposed to it being front page. I think it should be tucked away in a corner- but accessible.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Good! I did not misjudge you then.
    So what are you up to when youre not annoying mods?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Annoying members.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Ill be checking out your progress. Any successes so far?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Hundreds
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    This is a strong argument and difficult to refute.

    But I'm a bit of a fool and will try anyway, because the problem with rules is that they become a slippery slope. You always find you need more and can always justify more.

    A bit of give and take becomes necessary, where the group as a whole will just need to tolerate some dissatisfaction on both sides.

    Now maybe what you mean is better wording for the existing rules. But I still think the same caution must be taken.

    I speak of accountability but I've never seen a forum that needed it so little as this one. I could be wrong. I'm a green nube here.
    But over-all, I've seen the most effective and controlled, even if Human, moderators/Admins here. There's a balance here that is probably doomed to be lost before long. Maybe it's only my perspective.

    But on other forums, I've seen how mods and admins can abuse their powers of modship and justify doing so.

    I've seen how they can avoid that appearance by stepping back too far.

    Here, you're group is active enough in moderation, yet controlled enough, yet human enough. You aren't so controlled that you're uptight. You aren't so relaxed that you're too uneven and unfair. You're human.
    John Galt is catching some heat for telling someone off and normally, I'd be opposed to Galt for that behavior from a Moderator. But I'm not opposed and I agree- because he was allowed to be human without going too far, without being abusive on a regular basis. I think that kind of balance is very important.
    Look at how I've been bickering with Harold, yet I haven't had to confront his position on the forum, we've been confronting eachothers words. I've never seen an admin act that way on other forum and he should be applauded and given the respect due for such steadiness.
    I suspect that this balance won't last forever. It may even be a compliment of characters that will change when the characters change.
    Thanks. I appreciate your comments.

    I see your point about accountability, but maybe there's a better way. The ban log would leave a sort of an audit trail. If you think a moderator is being a jerk, you can go back over the ban log and build a case against him, then take it up with an admin or the site owner and air your grievances. This may or may not go your way, and will probably cause lots of hate and discontent.

    The current set of moderators were chosen by a kind of nomination, or election process. We've done that twice now, once with the original owner and again recently when we decided to add some more moderators. The owner still maintained veto power, but never needed to exercise it.

    What we could do it make it a regular event - maybe once a year or so. The incumbent moderators and admins (except Admin - he owns the place) would stand for reelection. If somebody has been too much of an ahole, they just wouldn't get reelected.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    I see your point about accountability, but maybe there's a better way. The ban log would leave a sort of an audit trail. If you think a moderator is being a jerk, you can go back over the ban log and build a case against him, then take it up with an admin or the site owner and air your grievances. This may or may not go your way, and will probably cause lots of hate and discontent.
    On another forum, the proposition was raised to enable "liking" posts.

    I was opposed. I felt it would be a pissing contest, one in which a popularity rule would be presented during disagreements.

    Yet, here you have that function enabled- and I've never seen (Green nube, keep in mind) anyone use it in any manner as I feared they would.

    I think you're being overly cautious and the problems you fear are not so likely to manifest.
    Besides, if a mod is being a jerk, that is accountability. You essentially, said, you don't want open accountability because if a mod does act like a jerk, then it can leave an audit trail to have a ban log. You also said all it takes is for one to fear that Mod is being a jerk. It's still accountability. The ban log shows what happened. It's less quoting, less relaying- it lays it out, rather than having someone tell you their interpretation of events.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,225
    Yet, here you have that function enabled- and I've never seen (Green nube, keep in mind) anyone use it in any manner as I feared they would.
    I think that's an advantage of having only a 'Like' function. The worst sites are those with like and unlike where teams of opposite minded people try to shout each other down.

    Doesn't always happen, there are a couple of science/other serious issues sites where the 'unlike' votes can conceal but not delete a comment - so a persistent troll/idiot/obsessive doesn't need to be banned because their comments are quickly blanked out of the comment stream.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    What we could do it make it a regular event - maybe once a year or so. The incumbent moderators and admins (except Admin - he owns the place) would stand for reelection. If somebody has been too much of an ahole, they just wouldn't get reelected.
    count me out from any election process - if someone asks me or nominates me for a certain job, i'm willing to accept, but i don't have a political bone in my body, so would not take part in any sort of beauty contest
    in fact, i'm of the opinion that you shouldn't trust anyone who volunteers to fill a position of authority - it tends to attract the self-promoters, and those in love with the idea of exerting power
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,107
    I think one benefit, that hasn't been mentioned, is that if we see explanations why someone was banned as well as links to the actual offending posts, it will provide real examples of what NOT to do. I learned from my older sister's mistakes. And I teach my kids to observe the actions that get people put in jail or killed (reading darwin awards is a good source for this) so that they can see what stupid looks like so that they don't repeat it themselves. And so they can recognize it and warn their friends if they see they are about to do something stupid.

    Basically, make an example for us. Put it in site feedback as a thread that is accessible only to mods for editing but open to all for reading.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    613
    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    On another forum, the proposition was raised to enable "liking" posts.

    I was opposed. I felt it would be a pissing contest, one in which a popularity rule would be presented during disagreements.

    Yet, here you have that function enabled- and I've never seen (Green nube, keep in mind) anyone use it in any manner as I feared they would.
    Every thread that I have read is a pissing contest, especially those where you intervene
    A better way to tune down this aspect is to acknowledge it at face value. I get very interesting information's just by reading the "likes". And it does not bloat the surface of my interface with "I agree etc... FULL comment".

    Rating trough likes, will only be feared by people like me. Because I don't give a dam about being liked. If my post are "unlike'ed" and disappear then I am in the wrong place, or I change. It is still my decision.

    I think control about some actions should be associated with a cost, to avoid abuse. If one have a few credits, one will pick his "fight" more carefully. That would damper the flaming, or the posting for some of the most futile of us.

    Very often I just want to comment on a particular part on a phrase, without having to start posting. I would like to be able to "tool-tipping" a post.
    question for you likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    I think one benefit, that hasn't been mentioned, is that if we see explanations why someone was banned as well as links to the actual offending posts, it will provide real examples of what NOT to do. I learned from my older sister's mistakes. And I teach my kids to observe the actions that get people put in jail or killed (reading darwin awards is a good source for this) so that they can see what stupid looks like so that they don't repeat it themselves. And so they can recognize it and warn their friends if they see they are about to do something stupid.

    Basically, make an example for us.

    Put it in site feedback as a thread that is
    accessible only to mods
    for editing but open to all for reading.
    HI! O Thoughtful one!
    Yours is a good example of GOOD thinking!
    I dont suppose that thread could have a sister thread?
    Showing us NOT what not to do but showing WHAT to do?
    (Im giving NO example as an exercise.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,107
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    I think one benefit, that hasn't been mentioned, is that if we see explanations why someone was banned as well as links to the actual offending posts, it will provide real examples of what NOT to do. I learned from my older sister's mistakes. And I teach my kids to observe the actions that get people put in jail or killed (reading darwin awards is a good source for this) so that they can see what stupid looks like so that they don't repeat it themselves. And so they can recognize it and warn their friends if they see they are about to do something stupid.

    Basically, make an example for us.

    Put it in site feedback as a thread that is
    accessible only to mods
    for editing but open to all for reading.
    HI! O Thoughtful one!
    Yours is a good example of GOOD thinking!
    I dont suppose that thread could have a sister thread?
    Showing us NOT what not to do but showing WHAT to do?
    (Im giving NO example as an exercise.)
    Well examples of what to do would be all the other threads on the forums where no one gets banned and the discussion goes reasonably well. Obviously we won't ever be passing around tea and cookies and holding pinky fingers and singing kumbaya, but we certainly can display a minimum level of civility, even in disagreements.
    KALSTER and sigurdV like this.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Forum Junior epidecus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    268
    If this is still up for thoughts, I'll throw in a nickel.

    I sometimes read the old threads here, as the discussions are pretty interesting. Often times, I come across a banned user. So if I'm curious as to why they were banned, I just check their recent posts, and voila ... There's the offensive or annoyingly intrusive post (or indiscreet spamming). Since the mods here always give warnings or notices on the very threads the post was on, it's never a mystery the reason for suspension as long as you do some shallow digging.

    Thus, creating a ban log would just bring up an organized motif that obviates what we can already access. At the meanwhile, it would be both intimidating and distracting to the forum's real scientific discussion.
    Dis muthufukka go hard. -Quote
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    I disagree- I've looked for it on some members and found nothing with "shallow digging" and I'm not too inclined to pm mods and ask about each one.

    In addition to that, you see some people not banned for posts they get warned for- having a cause you can identify is much more accountable than guesswork.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by sigurdV View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    I think one benefit, that hasn't been mentioned, is that if we see explanations why someone was banned as well as links to the actual offending posts, it will provide real examples of what NOT to do. I learned from my older sister's mistakes. And I teach my kids to observe the actions that get people put in jail or killed (reading darwin awards is a good source for this) so that they can see what stupid looks like so that they don't repeat it themselves. And so they can recognize it and warn their friends if they see they are about to do something stupid.

    Basically, make an example for us.

    Put it in site feedback as a thread that is
    accessible only to mods
    for editing but open to all for reading.
    HI! O Thoughtful one!
    Yours is a good example of GOOD thinking!
    I dont suppose that thread could have a sister thread?
    Showing us NOT what not to do but showing WHAT to do?
    (Im giving NO example as an exercise.)
    Well examples of what to do would be all the other threads on the forums where no one gets banned and the discussion goes reasonably well. Obviously we won't ever be passing around tea and cookies and holding pinky fingers and singing kumbaya, but we certainly can display a minimum level of civility, even in disagreements.
    Very reasonably said... but you missed my innuendo: Since only moderators would be able to write in the sister thread
    it would be moderators who would have to show the good example...do you see the problem now?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Understanding log and semi log graphs...
    By bashy in forum Mathematics
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: August 31st, 2011, 03:07 PM
  2. Dream Log
    By Hanuka in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: April 14th, 2009, 09:04 PM
  3. Log question/help
    By vayn23 in forum Mathematics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: February 29th, 2008, 11:32 AM
  4. log 2=0 ?
    By sramanujam in forum Mathematics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: September 8th, 2006, 11:46 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •