An Official Banning Policy?

I just don't see where "everybody be polite" is limited to "but only about people who can read what you say."

The problem is that when people ask you "Why was [person] banned?" There's really no way to be polite about some of this. I'm not claiming that I'm innocent of gravedancing, but I do think a certain amount of what-might-come-across-as insult is warranted, if only to answer the above question.

See, back when I was a kid, my parents taught me the old adage, "If you can't say anything nice about someone, don't say anything at all."

I am far from the only person here who doesn't stick to this.

edited 20th Jan '11 4:58:03 PM by SpainSun

I try not to "gravedance", though I don't see anything wrong with just saying "I won't miss Banned Josieph."

Because Banned Josieph is a joke, and you're supposed to bring that joke up every-so-often.

Also I try not to grave-dance, at least not on the fora. But the urge sometimes does get the better of me.

Oh, I gravedance. I gravedance so hard. I shall be dancing upon the graves of people forever.

But only in my head.

And really only one grave.

Punk.

<Mod Hat On> This thread isn't in Yack Fest; it's Pinned. Treating it as a Yack Fest thread is a good way to get the sort of attention that's being discussed.

Uh, sorry. Pinned is kind of a place where nobody ever talks, so we're not used to rules.

But I treat all threads like this...

I had something serious to ask but I forgot what it was. Well fuck.

edited 20th Jan '11 6:11:20 PM by Aondeug

Right. Getting back to the original topic, I think the site's banning policy seems to work fairly well, at least relatively speaking.

With the exception of the MOFW thread, you should treat Pinned as though it followed the OTC rules.

TBH I didn't know that, either. I'll add a note of that to the guidelines post in the rule thread.

I don't think it's ever been made explicit, but it seems quite implicit—the other threads are all threads that would end up on the left side if they weren't so important that we also needed the right-siders to notice them, and most of them are serious, policy/markup-related stuff.

edited 21st Jan '11 4:22:04 PM by Ironeye

I should add that "gravedancing" could be considered complaining about other tropers and be subject to the corresponding moderation rules. Asking why someone got banned is not in and of itself improper, but when a response is given that ought to settle the issue and not stir up a massive approval/protest movement.

Regarding posting examples of stuff that gets people banned: that's a very bad idea, and I've never ever seen a moderated forum that does it. It's bad for several reasons - one, it encourages the aforementioned "gravedancing"; two, it encourages misbehavior by showing potential trolls how far they can go before crossing the line; three, it acts as a Wall of Shame that trolls will use to brag about their accomplishments; four, it potentially violates the privacy of the person who was banned; lastly, it is disruptive to the wiki to focus on the past misdeeds of its users.

Now, I'll break a rule for a moment and allow that Scrye was removed because of the slow accumulation of ill will across the fora. He just got too much and it was collectively decided that he didn't need to be here any more. I read (fortunately) only a few of his posts but the ones that got him in trouble were hateful and inflammatory in a way that goes beyond simply messing with people or expressing a controversial opinion. Google bounce was used because there was no point in inviting him to troll via sockpuppet.

I maintain that Scrye wasn't a troll, and certainly not the sort that would sockpuppet in to cause more trouble, and if it were a concern that he was, I'd have watched for Scryepuppets and certainly have Google bounced at the first sign of such activities. But I am not in a position to make that decision, and hindsight is much more accurate than anyone's foresight. I admit that my feeling on the matter is bolstered by his reported declaration that he wouldn't come back even if invited.

Yeah, I don't think he cared enough to sockpuppet and stuff.

In that case, it shouldn't matter if he's allowed to read the wiki or not. But that's not my decision, either.

I'm guessing it's just the policy that if someone is banned for anything like trolling, they get the google bounce.

Waitafuckinminnit.

Scrye got banned? O_O

I knew he was a bit mean at times, but...Jeez. What the Hell happened, if I may ask?

thread

...Figures. How boring.

Y'know, even if I happily play by the rules of the fora and thus have little to fear, I still find irritating when policymakers and proles keep arguing about this or that or some stupid thing or another. It is an unhappy place.

edited 22nd Jan '11 12:30:35 AM by Charlatan

And again, this is not a thread for rambling conversations, please.

I still don't get how snowbull was being a dick.

Me neither.

I think there ought to be some kind of "three strikes" rule or something of the sort.

Troll us once, shame on you; troll us twice, Big Brother is watching; troll us three times and you're outa here?

Genuine trolls don't care about "three strikes" or any other similar deterrent measures. You have to blast them with all guns as soon as they show up. If you get an ordinary edit ban, you'll have the opportunity to appeal where it may be lifted if you talk nicely enough. If we Google bounce you and you weren't just an ordinary troll, then you've likely had far more than three strikes. More like twenty. Although Eddie's tolerance has its limits.