Banned Member Thread

Post Reply New Topic

This is something I've seen done on another forum, and I think it will be a good idea to do this on WP as well.
Whenever a member gets banned, it's difficult to figure out whether they are banned or not unless they put it in their signature. This leads to people talking about banned members, asking whether they are banned or not, which is against the forum rules. There are a few people on this forum whom I sent a PM but they didn't reply, and they don't visit the forum anymore. If I knew that they are banned, I wouldn't have sent them a PM since they can't read it anyway.

So, here's the idea. The mods should make a thread that is only accessble to them and whenever a member is banned, they will post their name in the thread, as well as the period of time for which they are banned. I think it's also a good idea to state the reason for the ban as there will be less disputes over the moderators' decisions that way.

Who likes this idea? Moderators' opinions are especially welcome.

It still leads to talking about banned members; it is just moderators who would be the ones breaking the rules. If a banned member wishes to contact Alex or a member of the moderation team, there are options available to them.


M.

I too have seen similar things on other sites.

I think it would be an excellent idea. A few months ago there was a lot of discussion about a particular long-term member who suddenly stopped posting. He wasn't replying to PM's and nobody knew how to contact him. He was much liked and while sometimes a little forthright with his views he was never offensive, so it didn't register that anyone would ban him.

We knew from earlier posts that he had serious health problems and had undergone major heart surgery and we began to think that he had died! It was only some considerable time later that we discovered he had been banned and the mods hadn't told anyone. They didn't even bother to post anything in a long thread that had appeared in the members section pondering his absence and people worrying about him!

One simple thing that maybe Mods could perhaps do is set the custom rank to "BANNED" so at least people know what is what. That couldn't be construed as discussing a banned member.

I thought they already did that? It seems I've seen a few posters, who had some sort of red x and a 'banned' label attached to their post. Maybe I was wrong about it, but I've seen that a few times, on more than one account.

My personal thoughts on this...

Members who are banned always know exactly why they have been banned.

It is their business, and their business only.

Publicly humiliating them is not something we have any desire to do.

As makuranososhi has already said, banned members have options for appealing their ban, and some indeed do so, and are reinstated once they have undertaken not to continue doing those things that earned them the ban in the first place.

======

An occasion when a username gets a "banned" badge is when the username is a member opening a second account - to make it clear that to do so is completely against the rules... and will make us very much less likely to reinstate them.

well, the issue here seems about people not knowing members are banned and they are talking about them when there is a rule against discussing them.


[user-A40 is banned]
user-B21: where is user-A40?
user-D93: I don't know, he has not posted anything for quite some time.
user-B21: Too bad, he is interesting........................
user-D93: Yes, he usually.........................
user-M01: Do not talk about banned members, it's against the rules.
user-B21: I didn't know he was banned.

I think pretty much that seems to be the idea, no?

Just a few thoughts and tangents on the matter, from my personal perspective:

There are no perfect solutions. That which does the greatest good for the greatest number is a concept which I find most applicable here... and note that the wording, that of doing the "greatest good" - not the most popular or most convenient.

Once a member is banned, the site rules forbid discussing them or the situation in the forums. What you suggest is in direct violation of that expressly written rule.

Giving more publicity or notoriety to an individual who has been banned goes against every fiber of my being.

As a teacher, I remember one student in particular who took apparent pride in having been kicked out of every group that he had joined. So I refused to give him the satisfaction - if he was going to leave, he was going to quit on his own.


M.

No.

One of the aims of WP as far as I'm aware is to encourage dialogue a sense of community between its members and I dare say a degree of friendship between various members. When a friend suddenly disappears without explanation it is naturally going to lead to dialogue where their friends question the persons absence. Sometimes people go away on holiday, or just get fed up of WP for a while or maybe they have committed suicide or become ill or got run over by a bus. In real life people would be asking shared associates and friends what has become of their mutual friend. It seems to be catch-22 on WP. You aren't allowed to talk about banned members but you aren't allowed to be told they are banned. Doesn't that sound just a little bit illogical and maybe even somewhat callous regarding the feelings of other members?

No.

All members of WP have read the rules (a requirement, before posting). It is therefore clearly one of several options, when a member ceases posting, that they may have been banned. Typically, viewing their recent posts will make it quite obvious if that may have been the case.

You give examples of other instances when a member may stop posting. Please explain in which such instances public discussion of their absence would be useful and appropriate?

I have several ways to get in touch with people I have met on WP. If I were banned, those people would get in touch with me, or me with them. If people bond so well on WP that they would be missed, why wouldn't you already know how to contact them outside of WP?

just sayin'

Honestly, there are a lot of people on WP that I would be like if they suddenly stopped posting, but wouldn't have any way to contact them. Maybe that's just 'cause I haven't been here as long as some other members..


Ah-ha, I was wondering about that!


That's a good point.. I suppose something could have happened in PMs?



Of course, from what I can tell nobody gets real trouble for things that are done non-maliciously.. There was a thread awhile ago that was talking about a particular non-banned member, and while the name was moderated out and people were told to stop talking about other members, nobody was treated like they were bad or anything like that, cause it was pretty obvious that nobody meant any harm.. So that might make this whole thing kinda a moot point.

well I have been wondering about a user who have stopped posting, and I don't see much of a reason for that person being banned, I can speculate that if said person was banned, the posts may have been deleted, I can also think that they may have just moved on to something else and stopped posting here, might as well had an accident, etc.

The question is, does the lack of knowledge of a member matter or not when it comes to the issue?
Is that a bannable offense or at which point it becomes the case?



No what?

In my experience, I have never seen a member on WP get banned themselves for inadvertently bringing up someone who has been banned. There have been instances where the issue has been pressed beyond that point, and pushed further after being warned on the matter, but those have been extremely rare occurrences. If you have a question, you might be better served inquiring with a moderator in private than posting in the forums - and thus avoid breaking the rule entirely.


M.

I'm not sure what these questions are asking.




Are you quoting my answer to your earlier question:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp2480965.html#2480965

or are you quoting my answer to TallyMan's question:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp2481025.html#2481025

If it was the former, I answered your question: "I think pretty much that seems to be the idea, no?", with "No", because I felt your suggested scenario did not make real sense, and hence could not really be "the idea". Your fabricated dialogue makes it appear than a ban might be a surprise to people who were familiar with a particular user, when that just doesn't happen.

As you yourself say in this latest post: "... I don't see much of a reason ...", thereby acknowledging that you do see a reason for them being banned.

There are rumors about arbitrary bans that lead some people to think that small accidental things may cause people to get banned. I think the "don't see much of a reason" meant "don't see a good/plausible reason, but can't be totally sure, 'cause I heard a rumor that the moderators don't need a reason to ban people."
Before the first time I actually went to a moderator about something, I figured that if I complained about anything, I'd just be told to go elsewhere if I didn't like it, because that's what I was told would happen. I've since decided that the people who complain about moderators are just causing trouble, and the person who first told me about how people get arbitrarily banned turned out to be really manipulative and not very nice. There are people who say things about how the moderators don't like them because they're better than the moderators are. I should have realized the ridiculousness of that argument.. But it's easy for people with social issues to get caught up in that fear that someone will just randomly reject you, especially when you don't totally understand what it is that has caused that phenomenon in the past.



Yea, that's what I meant about it being a moot point