i don't want to single you out but you have never reported a lounge post so, on paper, 'we' think that redleader is fine with what's going on in the lounge. there's a mechanism for bringing to our attention posts which you think are a problem. you've chosen not to use it so, in many cases, it's hard to reconcile people telling us "the lounge sucks" with the fact that they chose not to do anything about it. further, the burden is not great - there's a button right next to a post and all people have to do is click it, type "i think this post breaks guidelines" and press a button.I will say this, the subjective nature of what is and what is not allowed in The Lounge on BL is a complete joke. People have said it before, but a LOT of stuff is let through that is clearly against the rules as linked-to on the forum homepage.
it's my opinion that the lounge staff - and the lounge community in general - have a good grasp of what goes and what does not. those who were recently banned had over 30 warnings and numerous temp bans between them. to hear them say (or you say on their behalf) "we didn't know we were doing anything wrong" is cynical nonsense. they knew exactly that what they were doing was wrong but did it anyway. do you think that writing "atri is a nigger lover" is acceptable?So yes, as it stands people actually don't know what's right or wrong in the Lounge, so who can REALLY blame attitudes anywhere from confustion to disdain over situations such as this with CG.
cg had 13 warnings and numerous temporary bans. at what point does somebody get the message that posts like that are unacceptable?
i have never been a fan of mandatory sentencing because it removes discretionary power from those who are closest to the issues - the forum staff. we've (senior staff have) been accused of being too authoritarian. damned if we do and damned if we don't? sure.The Administrators of BL, I believe, need to objectifty the rules for The Lounge and be sure that the lounge mods don't give anybody breaks. And IMO clear numerical rules need to be made about how many warnings it takes to be banned, and how many temp bans lead to a perminent ban.
we prefer, generally, to defer to forum staff and having mandatory limits removes that power. further, i made the point to fjones about different standards of behaviour across different forums and having a rigid '3 warnings and you are banned' approach creates problems there too. we could mitigate this with a more subtly defined set of warnings which have different values in different forums but there is work to be done there and that time would be much better spent on other tasks which are more central to the mission of the site.
alasdair