Info Changes to our site disciplinary system

In the end it makes it a little easier, because this way we dont always have to be on the lookout for their new accounts to ban on sight, this way if they really want back on the site they wont register new accounts, and if they do register when they arent supposed to they will be automatically banned, which is what would happen anyway, so it cuts back on the work a little for us, plus now with the names being viewable by the public, theres a lot more people on the look out for them.
 
Mariposa said:
TLB/any other admin in the know: what sort of conduct on the part of a member could/would result in a ban such as Splatt received? Repeated disruption and registration of alts seems to have a bit less impact than it did when I was on staff. Where, if anywhere, is the line formally drawn? It appears that while such matters are approached on a case-by-case basis, in order for this approach to be ultimately feasible, uniformity is needed.
Click to expand...

No formal line drawn as yet, and even the 3 pt "Major Violation" lacks definition...so the refinement of this policy continues within the staff forum. There are other points, beyond those raised thus far, which are holes in the proposed change and we need to address them. It may fall to the 'staff consensus' that was used in issuing "Ban on Sight" status, meaning someone has to fuck up a lot and piss off a LOT of people, in order to earn such big bans. If anyone has other questions, or sees other problems, please raise them here so we can create a healthier and more robust and well-defined system so everyone knows where they stand as a member receiving warnings or infractions; and the rest of us have less questions in hand when someone near us gets sent of a holiday. Thank you.
 
They can, but if its caught and found out who it belongs to the new account is banned and the original temp ban is doubled.
 
Mariposa said:
I have another question, if I may ask.

TLB/any other admin in the know: what sort of conduct on the part of a member could/would result in a ban such as Splatt received? Repeated disruption and registration of alts seems to have a bit less impact than it did when I was on staff. Where, if anywhere, is the line formally drawn? It appears that while such matters are approached on a case-by-case basis, in order for this approach to be ultimately feasible, uniformity is needed.
Click to expand...

Is posting disgusting pornography grounds for a temp/perm ban? If not let's make an amendment to reflect this.

"People can change"

Yeah right, just like the US government can change - for the worse. :|
 
^I'm surprised you would totally dismiss that. So, totally anti psychotherapy?. People have a whole range of behaviors which they can choose to use or not. Behavior modification works for many people. People can have hidden negative behaviors that they have not shown yet and people who have shown negative behaviors don't have to repeat those behaviors. Sure there are people who won't stop some negative behaviors for as long as they live but that's not everyone. I'm glad BL administration has more faith in people than u C.H ;)
 
Theres ways of knowing, often times through other members or the person even outing themself, but again if they manage to fly under the radar without causing trouble, props to them.
 
Z Y G G Y said:
^I'm surprised you would totally dismiss that. So, totally anti psychotherapy?. People have a whole range of behaviors which they can choose to use or not. Behavior modification works for many people. People can have hidden negative behaviors that they have not shown yet and people who have shown negative behaviors don't have to repeat those behaviors. Sure there are people who won't stop some negative behaviors for as long as they live but that's not everyone. I'm glad BL administration has more faith in people than u C.H ;)
Click to expand...

Obviously, Zyggy, people do change.

A lot of people will never change though. I have witnessed people living their entire lives until they're old and at death's door without changing.

Some people do change, Zyggy. Others don't. I don't really appreciate how childish your response was.
 
Captain.Heroin said:
Is posting disgusting pornography grounds for a temp/perm ban? If not let's make an amendment to reflect this.
Click to expand...


what one person defines as nasty porno, another is going to see as fine and dandy...

how would you quantitatively decide what is disgusting?
 
Here's what you should be asking: does it violate the blua or forum guidelines? If not, then ua-ing the post should be the extent of moderation. If its being spammed over and over again in an obvious attempt at causing problems, then a warning should be issued, and handled like any other spammer. i can't see any reason for an amendment, as this case should be handled like any other, and will often just be a judgement call by the acting mod.
 
BUMP - updated initial post with information related to the number of days a member will be suspended dependent upon the number of active points they have earned. Staff can issue a warning in place of an infraction, which will leave a mark on their profile, but not incur any points towards suspension. This is at the moderator's discretion.
 
I haven't been here for very long, but I do feel that the rules regarding banned status are very sensible. I have been a long time member to forums aligned to less controversial topics (legally) and the rules there were much more harsh. In other words, there would be an automated system to handle warnings, then once at the maximum level the account was permanently banned.

I do appreciate how openly oriented this community is, but would anyone care to explain the reasoning behind it... or maybe I will figure it all out as I advance here :)
 
^ this pretty much sums up what brought about the changes:
Delsyd said:
some of them have come back without our knowing and have behaved just fine and been productive members. Only later for us to findout it was actually them.

People can and do change, and i dont see why they dont deserve another chance. especially if they are willing to wait such a time to come back to a community that means something to them.
Click to expand...
 
alasdairm said:
at what point do you finally realize they have no desire whatsoever to contribute to the community?

alasdair
Click to expand...

That is subjective bro. Who is anyone to judge that they do not or will not contribute?
 
^ of course it is subjective. there are calls in this thread for people to get a second chance. well, some people were given a second chance and they came back and were as disruptive, if not moreso. so they were given a third chance and they came back and were as disruptive, if not moreso. so they were given a fouth chance and they came back and were as disruptive, if not moreso. so they were given a sixth chance and they came back and were as disruptive, if not moreso. etc.

are you suggesting that there is no point where you just say, "ok, they're done for good"? if not, how many chances should people get? what is reasonable (irony aside)?

alasdair
 
alasdairm said:
^ of course it is subjective. there are calls in this thread for people to get a second chance. well, some people were given a second chance and they came back and were as disruptive, if not moreso. so they were given a third chance and they came back and were as disruptive, if not moreso. so they were given a fouth chance and they came back and were as disruptive, if not moreso. so they were given a sixth chance and they came back and were as disruptive, if not moreso. etc.

are you suggesting that there is no point where you just say, "ok, they're done for good"? if not, how many chances should people get? what is reasonable (irony aside)?

alasdair
Click to expand...

If they are being general jackasses with no bad intent, just keep Temp Banning, eventually they will learn. Some of the people you have banned permanently are not bad. Some are sick, others have humor not appreciated by those in power, while others just enjoy being silly but never had the intent to do harm. Honestly I think it harsh for someone to be banned because they called someone a "double nigger" or a "kike" or used hateful terms when terms like faggot, ginny, limey, dingo fucker, (prefix)fag, tweeker, junkie, homo, gay etc... are passed back and forth between users like a joint.

However, if they are soliciting sales of drugs, hacking, spamming websites, being seriously racist, flooding the forums with hardcore scat porn, and actually threatening users with the intent to do harm then they should be fucking banned on sight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top