# Banned Member - PM A Moderator **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [September 27, 2012, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047 "2012-09-27T18:11:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Cicero](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cicero/32/3594_2.png) [@Cicero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cicero)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/21 "2012-09-28T14:56:59Z")
> [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > With most trolls, we also cause all their past posts to disappear. It’s all part of “do not feed the trolls.” We frankly have very little clue what turns these jerks on, but it’s usually attention-mongering. And the persistent one keep returning as socks, which get banned. We’re hoping that not giving them any attention at all will discourage them and they’ll go away and leave us alone. Seeing their name in print (OK, in pixel), regardless of context, seems to give them great glee. > > We’re not hiding the information; we’ll happily tell you in private. We just don’t want them to have publicity. If we started one thread that listed the names of trolls who were banned, there would be more incentive for them to irritate us (“Oooh, oooh, if this name gets banned, it’ll be announced as number 100 on the list!!”). > > And generally, if the poster does have some history, we _do_ provide explanation. But when such a person has been banned and then comes back with five different socks, we don’t think we need to provide five more explanations. This is one of the rules which I find difficult to fathom, in the context of it having any benefit. The definition of a troll is someone who posts off topic, extraneous or inflammatory material to get an emotional outburst from the reader. It is not so much attention seeking or seeing their name in print. The method I see adopted is a solution looking for a problem. I would have imagined it would be less work for a short note attached to a closed thread rather than having mods individually answer a number of PM’s. ---
**Author:** ![Sicks\_Ate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Sicks\_Ate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sicks_Ate)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/22 "2012-09-28T15:05:35Z")
Explanation of **mhendo** ’s suspension [here.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15536584&postcount=1) Good thing he didn’t get banned, we’d have to figure it out for ourselves. What’s the difference? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/23 "2012-09-28T15:09:55Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > So if I PM you, and you tell me in private, and I then post what you told me in an open thread, would I be in Dutch? No, that’s not a problem. > [@Sicks\_Ate](#): > > What’s the difference? You’re comparing situations that are handled differently. We announce suspensions and bans of longtime members because it’s reasonable to inform people about those actions. We don’t announce bans of socks and trolls because we’re trying to deny them a little attention in the hope it’s a disincentive to further socking and trolling. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/24 "2012-09-28T15:15:30Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > We’re trying to reduce the attention as a way of removing their incentive to come back I know a guy (he’s a friend of ours) who could make certain a troll doesn’t come back. 'Nuff said. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/25 "2012-09-28T15:24:16Z")
Face it, most people who get banned do so for being a jerk, continuing to be a jerk after being warned or even suspended about it, and finally getting banned for it. Do you want a bunch of threads from TPTB that say “X was banned for saying mean things even after being told to stop”? Or would you prefer a thread with links to all the mean things X said, and the PM’s that went back and forth? Or, what I really suspect is that there are a bunch of people who would complain “But whhhhhyyyyyyy?” after Hitler is banned for pro-Nazi sentiments and Jesus is banned for criticizing Pharisees without adequate cites. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/26 "2012-09-28T15:52:46Z")
> [@kunilou](#): > > Do you want a bunch of threads from TPTB that say “X was banned for saying mean things even after being told to stop”? > > Or would you prefer a thread with links to all the mean things X said, and the PM’s that went back and forth? We already do that. We’re discussing why we don’t do it for trolls and previously bannees who are using sock accounts. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Borgia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/larry_borgia/32/156_2.png) [@Larry\_Borgia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Borgia)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/27 "2012-09-28T16:14:51Z")
I think that when you deny a troll the teaspoon of attention it would get with a locked post saying “ **Imatroll** has been banned fro trolling,” you are guaranteeing it a liter of attention when one of our hundreds (thousands?) of posters inevitably–whether because they are new or because they slip up and forget the rule–posts a thread titled “Why was **Imatroll** banned?” Not to mention that people will start talking about it in whatever pit thread the troll was last trolling in. ---
**Author:** ![MeanOldLady](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/meanoldlady/32/10737_2.png) [@MeanOldLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MeanOldLady)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/28 "2012-09-28T16:21:13Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > I think it works pretty well. Although we have a small number of persistent trolls who keep coming back (and who are probably mentally ill), most trolls seem to be one-shots. > > Thanks for asking.😉 So the persistent trolls keep coming back despite this rule. Yeah, seems like a good system. > [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](#): > > We frankly have very little clue what turns these jerks on, but it’s usually attention-mongering. And the persistent one keep returning as socks, which get banned. We’re hoping that not giving them any attention at all will discourage them and they’ll go away and leave us alone. Seeing their name in print (OK, in pixel), regardless of context, seems to give them great glee. What makes you so sure that people talking about them is what they’re going after? I’m no expert in trollery, but my understanding of it is trolls just like to fuck with people. What makes you think they’re not just getting their jollies by fucking with you guys, making you track them down and ban them? They probably don’t give two fucks if someone starts an ATMB thread about them. In fact, I’m sure they don’t, because we’re not allowed to and they still come back. ---
**Author:** ![Cicero](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cicero/32/3594_2.png) [@Cicero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cicero)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/29 "2012-09-28T16:25:43Z")
> [@MeanOldLady](#): > > So the persistent trolls keep coming back despite this rule. Yeah, seems like a good system. > > What makes you so sure that people talking about them is what they’re going after? I’m no expert in trollery, but my understanding of it is trolls just like to fuck with people. What makes you think they’re not just getting their jollies by fucking with you guys, making you track them down and ban them? They probably don’t give two fucks if someone starts an ATMB thread about them. In fact, I’m sure they don’t, because we’re not allowed to and they still come back. Do you reckon you could work “fuck” in there one more time? 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/30 "2012-09-28T16:29:58Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > So if I PM you, and you tell me in private, and I then post what you told me in an open thread, would I be in Dutch? > [@Marley23](#): > > No, that’s not a problem. Then again I’m left to wonder what’s wrong with cutting out the middle man. ---
**Author:** ![MeanOldLady](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/meanoldlady/32/10737_2.png) [@MeanOldLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MeanOldLady)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/31 "2012-09-28T16:32:21Z")
> [@Cicero](#): > > Do you reckon you could work “fuck” in there one more time? 🙂 Please! This is a family joint. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/32 "2012-09-28T16:39:46Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > Then again I’m left to wonder what’s wrong with cutting out the middle man. I realize it comes off as convoluted. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/33 "2012-09-28T16:55:03Z")
I can see the reasoning behind this rule and I think it’s valid. Trolls enjoy nothing so much as attention. To ban them and then perhaps spend a whole long thread discussing their posts is tantamount to saying, “Hey, we banned you but please stick around a while, someone is sure to open a thread on you which I know you’ll find pleasing. And be sure to revisit us regularly for new responses to the thread!” No, casting them into the dark backward and abysm of time makes far better sense. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/34 "2012-09-28T16:58:23Z")
**aldiboronti** , I may have to steal that phrasing for the next time this question comes up. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/35 "2012-09-28T17:09:14Z")
I do think one of the drawbacks of this policy (which I agree with) is that it reduces awareness to the rest of the posting population. Every time someone mentions one of the more…prolific socks on the SDMB, there are invariably some long-time dopers who respond with “Who?”. The lack of attention doesn’t seem to stop the sock from repeatedly returning, and there are fewer people aware of the issue who can keep an eye out in the future. Maybe try a test case at some point? Next time someone starts a thread asking, “what happened to AnnoyingSockPuppetX?”, let it run its course, and see what the results are. If the added attention draws that sock back in for another pass, then the mods/admins can say in the future “Nope, we’ve tried that, and it didn’t work. Case closed.” ---
**Author:** ![Sicks\_Ate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Sicks\_Ate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sicks_Ate)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/36 "2012-09-28T17:10:45Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I realize it comes off as convoluted. Saying ‘comes off as’ indicates that the process isn’t _actually_ convoluted. Please explain how it is not convoluted, it just seems that way. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Borgia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/larry_borgia/32/156_2.png) [@Larry\_Borgia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Borgia)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/37 "2012-09-28T17:13:19Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > I can see the reasoning behind this rule and I think it’s valid. Trolls enjoy nothing so much as attention. To ban them and then perhaps spend a whole long thread discussing their posts is tantamount to saying, “Hey, we banned you but please stick around a while, someone is sure to open a thread on you which I know you’ll find pleasing. And be sure to revisit us regularly for new responses to the thread!” > > No, casting them into the dark backward and abysm of time makes far better sense. you don’t need a whole thread. A single sentence will do, then lock the thread. Basically a shorter version of the procedure with long term members. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/38 "2012-09-28T17:15:12Z")
> [@Munch](#): > > Maybe try a test case at some point? Next time someone starts a thread asking, “what happened to AnnoyingSockPuppetX?”, let it run its course, and see what the results are. If the added attention draws that sock back in for another pass, then the mods/admins can say in the future “Nope, we’ve tried that, and it didn’t work. Case closed.” I may be speculating, but it may be that in the past such threads _were_ allowed, resulting in the rules that now exist. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/39 "2012-09-28T17:17:00Z")
> [@Larry\_Borgia](#): > > you don’t need a whole thread. A single sentence will do, then lock the thread. Basically a shorter version of the procedure with long term members. Would that be coupled with a strict rule that further discussion about the banning is strictly forbidden? ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Borgia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/larry_borgia/32/156_2.png) [@Larry\_Borgia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Borgia)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2012, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047/40 "2012-09-28T17:35:24Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Would that be coupled with a strict rule that further discussion about the banning is strictly forbidden? Sure, that would be fine. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/banned-member-pm-a-moderator/636047.md?page=3)