Mach said:

I don't know of this situation ever taking place, nor do I condone it. If permabanned, all like accounts should/will be permabanned as well. If it is noticed that the user is back, that user is permabanned as well. If it is known that a permabanned member is back and nothing is done about it, that's news to me.

Not to say that it should be considered the best option to use, but, if used should be one that is made after careful consideration of the violations, facts and history. I myself have made errors in judgement on this very issue. It is with this in mind that I offer my opinion.

I've said it before though, it is a necessary evil.

June7 said:

Oh really? I wrote about it in my open letter to Ben as well as addressed it with the mod I have seen interact with said banned Orgers.

But, I am a whiner who bitches too much so who cares?

June7 said:

This problem I can understand, but I do feel giving someone say, a 6-month ban with a warning of the next one being a 12-month (virtually permanent!), will mean that a) they spend enough time away from the site to potentially get bored of it and simply leave of their own volition, and b) be a far stronger incentive to be good rather than, say, a 2-week ban.

Also, I raised this before, but more as a side-thought, however this time perhaps we could actively discuss it, but what about permanent banning from certain forums? i.e. Banned from P&R, but not GD? I think that would be a truly effective way of stopping GD minor issues resulting in larger, lengthier bans due to someone's P&R rep - we all know politics and debates get heated, especially with the mix we have here - so this may prove an effective solution?

Stymie said:

I believe you mentioned trolls. I don't recall you ever listing a specific orger who fit this scenario.

June7 said:

This is what I said and I didn't mention names because the last time I did, I got a warning from you:

Permanently banned Orgers who are friends/friendly with mods are allowed to stay while others are not. Permanently banned Orgers even post pictures of themselves here. I do not particularly care if this goes on but at least be fair about it. One stays, all stay. One goes, all go.

Stymie said:

That's why we have orgnotes. If you want specific answers to specific questions and want to follow the guidelines in regards to orgers' privacy, use the orgnotes.

June7 said:

Which Stymie does.

sosgemini said:

Yeah I do but I can admit I have been very vocal about the moderation on this site. I promise not to do so anymore.

Anxiety said:

I completely get what you're saying too. I think where the problem arises from people having differing opinions of what "being an ass" entails. Permabans are surprising to individuals because much of the time they weren't aware of having crossed such a serious line as to be permabanned. On the flip side of the coin, I know that many permabans come after repeated warnings and temp bans, but there will always be that small percentage who are taken aback/overly-severely punished.

I don't think it's a softening of the banning structure that's being called for either, but rather a re-organisation. The jump from 2-week ban to permaban seems just too great for me, when you consider how active, and how involved (even in a relationship, etc) some users are with this site.

Perhaps even some private email correspondance could be held with such individuals prior to their receiving a permaban if they are facing one imminently (one last chance to justify themselves and swear to never do it again - mod would then have email evidence as justification for permaban if said user reoffended, etc). I still prefer more tiers being introduced though. I do think a 6-month ban would be a more suitable deterrent. Or a permaban from a specific forum.

Spookymuffin said:

I agree with you that more notice or correspondence should happen before someone is permabanned on the org.
Also the idea about a temp ban or ban from a specific forum would be a good idea as well.
Gotta go answer some orgnotes... my box is full.

MrsMdiver said:

I really like the idea about a ban from a specific forum.

Serious said:

I guess all we can do is express our opinions and hope that we are heard. Maybe something good will come of it.

Maybe a better way to go is to have an Ignore feature, if possible. I know we have it with OrgNotes, so can it be instituted for the boards?

And if so, can you let everyone back in?

I've been busy and missed the banning of Phil and MuthaFunka. They are, IMHO, polar opposites but based on my experiences with them, I think banning either one of them is unwarranted.

Heck, I think banning anyone is not right. It's just a message board, after all. If mods can delete offensive posts, what is the point of banning someone? Just let the mods do their job.

Maybe a better way to go is to have an Ignore feature, if possible. I know we have it with OrgNotes, so can it be instituted for the boards?

And if so, can you let everyone back in?

Graycap23 said:

Wow. Why I am I not surprised this happened. Surely this right here is a better candidate for some form of punishment than what mdiver was banned for? This level of immaturity is staggering.

I've been busy and missed the banning of Phil and MuthaFunka. They are, IMHO, polar opposites but based on my experiences with them, I think banning either one of them is unwarranted.

Heck, I think banning anyone is not right. It's just a message board, after all. If mods can delete offensive posts, what is the point of banning someone? Just let the mods do their job.

Maybe a better way to go is to have an Ignore feature, if possible. I know we have it with OrgNotes, so can it be instituted for the boards?

And if so, can you let everyone back in?

RodeoSchro said:

I agree. An ignore feature would solve a whole lot of the drama around here. It could even be implemented that a mod is notified when an offensive Orger has reached a set limit of ignores. At which time perma-banning could then be considered.

I miss MuthaFunka too and really can't see why he was perma-banned when others have behaved far worse and are still posting as I type.
[Edited 6/17/08 18:25pm]

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

Then why not orgnote the mods with the list of those "others". We mods cannot be everywhere. Help us to help you.

luv4u said:

Why bother, it's not like it isn't already common knowledge. No one expects the Mods to be everywhere, hence the requests for ignore features. If you really want to help, then help us help ourselves.

Spookymuffin said:

Yes, I know you really want him gone too, and it shows. Let go of that hate friend, nobody hates you.

Mdiver and Mutha were banned for more than one simple offense, we all know that.

Continued hostilities exist because points of view are not respected and considered hostile towards your friends. Nobody hates you, no one is trying to demonize you, no one is trying to shut you up.

What goes for one should go for the other, its simple. It hurts, but the mods did what they thought was fair, and continue to do so.

Polar opposites in views, but both are men, both deserve respect. Let's not talk about what's immature, I can say much to that as well.

I saw his post before Luv4U snipped it. It was not an unfair statement, but she did what was needed.

paintedlady said:

I don't know who he is?!

Spookymuffin said:

Well dayum.... nevermind then

paintedlady said:

It was more at the idea of disrespecting someone on a thread that is trying to solve a long-running problem, not just save mdiver.

paintedlady said:

It was more at the idea of disrespecting someone on a thread that is trying to solve a long-running problem, not just save mdiver.