Banning vs. Revoking Posting Privileges

In this thread, Euty said:

I don’t recall ever seeing this mentioned before.

What is the difference between being banned and having your posting privileges revoked?

Is revoking posting privileges temporary, and banning permanent?

Thanks in advance.

Having your posting privileges revoked can mean one of several things:
[ul][li]The poster has asked the administrators to prevent them from posting: a way of taking a “leave of absence” from the boards.[/li][li]If an administrator has some questions regarding membership status and/or other posting issues, they may suspend a poster’s privileges temporarily until the question is answered.[/li][li]If you post too many times in one of the ‘Comments’ forums without providing a link, your privileges may be suspended until we have time to send someone over to your house to throw a cream pie in your face.[/ul][/li]
Banning, on the other hand, means that the person has broken one or more SDMB rules and is under a (presumably) permanent interdiction.

And sometimes they revoke posting privileges to mean exactly the same as banning. You’ll see this on some threads where the poster returns with a similar name/number a few times.

There are a few different things that can happen in combination when posting privileges are suspended, discussed here

  1. The word BANNED appears under the name. The threads aren’t locked.
  2. All the posts from a name disappear.
  3. Chrome Spot’s threads were closed but he still is shown as “member”, not banned.
    And there’s a note from manhattan that he "forfeited his status as our guest "
  4. Sometimes they become some other category, like “Guest” or “Obvious Impostor”.
  5. There was one created in January.
    Somebody asked about it on ATMB, and a mod (UncleBeer?) said yes it was a recently banned poster, and they had made him a Guest by accident. (I wish I could recall the name. I tried to go back, but the thread seems to have been removed, so I suppose they corrected it to Banned, or removed all the posts so he had no record at all.)
  6. Sometimes no other indication a person has been blocked instead of banned, but it appears in later discussion, as happened with CumulativeTheoryInsanity

To clear things up, first, I never said this and second, we have a range of options available to us when temporarily, or permanently removing posting privileges from someone.

As for you Soul, since don’t appear to understand the idea of banning, let me explain it. We ban people, not screen names. If we find a previously banned poster returning under a new screen name without our permission, that new name is also deactivated. Without notice. The instances you are speaking of are not what we would call “normal” examples. Okay?