Out of all these 15,000 members, how many have been banned?
I dunno, we don’t keep count of that kind of thing; if the system didn’t automatically show the number of registered members we have we probably wouldn’t keep track of that either.
I would bet it’s not a lot, though, when measured against the rest of the membership. If I had to guess, I’d put the number at less than 200-300 and that includes all those duplicate screen names by persistent pests.
your humble TubaDiva
Administrator
I’m wondering, Tuba… (I’ve asked this before but I don’t remember if I got an answer)… does the number of “Registered Users” include these banned names? Or just names that have their posting privileges active?
While we’re bugging you, Tuba, I was wondering if the banned person’s username is banned forever as well. Will there never be another fatherjohn, inor, or Satan? Not that I think many people would like to start out with a name that already has a negative taint to it on the SDMB, but I was curious about it.
The “Registered Users” number includes banned posters. That figure is simply a running total registrations submitted. It does not decrement when a screen name is banned.
Names, once used, are gone forever. The only way to make a name available for use again would be to delete the registration record for it. Something we do not do.
I suppose deleting the registration record for a screen name might cause the “Registered Users” counter to decrement, however.
[stiffler]
Dude, you said taint! pffffft
[/stiffler]
LOL
You got me there, jarbabyj. 
Thanks, UncleBeer, I always wondered about that.
'Nilla, I respond to your question here. Sorta.
Fenris
Judging from Anthracite’s extensive and impressive board statistics, it looks like less than two percent of registered names are banned. Of course, since many troublemakers get banned repeatedly under different names, it’s safe to say that a far smaller percentage of actual members have been banned. On the other hand, that’s just among registered members, and a quarter of registered members have never posted at all, and hence never gotten the chance to be banned.
Yes, I do realize that two specimens out of a sample of 112 is an awfully small sample size, and that there’ll be error trying to apply that same percentage to the whole population of board users. My statistics book is at the office, though, and I don’t remember how to figure the error.
FTR - I thought of doing a follow-up survey for a second. Then I remembered that whole SDMB-Server-is-bogged-down-and-crying-and-why-the-Hell-would-I-make-it-worse stuff, so I will not do a follow-up, unless I ask permission first and receive it.
I’ve been keeping score, and the total is over 500 that have been “banned” (where the word appears under the name). A much larger number would be included under the term “blocked”, which is like banning but the word does not appear. The person cannot post under that name. This tends to be obvious when a new name appears with the complaint that a prior name was banned. This causes confusion among the uninitiated, who claim the new name must be an imposter since the prior name does have the word Banned under it. BTW, Chonos’ observation that troublemakers get repeatly banned could be expanded to include the many non-troublemakers who also get repeatly banned, usually for simply stating the obvious, without rancor, but contradicting the official versions of things.
So…do you have a list of these 500 or more? Are you certain it’s that many? 
And then there are those who seem to post only criticism about the way the board is run. If someone is banned and then re-registers, that’s a violation of the board rules.
Ma Parrot, justify the continuance of your posting privileges. Do you ever do ANYTHING but criticize the way this board is run? If your main purpose is merely to bitch, I WILL ban you.
Lynn
She seems to post regular things. Perhaps you are only senstive to some topics.
I suggest you take your own handle’s advice.
No offense Lynn, but I couldn’t resist!
Do you perhaps have a few links, Don’t poke the bear? I only recall Ma Parrot posting criticisms, but perhaps I’ve missed or forgotten other posts.
You seem to have fallen into the same trap as Lynn.
Why don’t you do what I did, and undoubtedly what Don’tPoke did - click her Search button.
See. Regular stuff.
I have seen this attitude before, though. The mods are so defensive that if anyone says anything, even the mildest item like that above, it is taken as all out warfare. Grow up mods. There’s plenty of imperfection around. You don’t have to vilify everyone who notices a thing or two.
Good heavens people! How can you doubt Ma Parrot? She has a list. A List! You can’t argue with a list!
Senator McCarthy had a list too and look at…um…
I’ve heard some on the extreme right claim to have lists of gay people in the milatary an…hmmm…
I, myself, have a list of posters who, as Lynn said, are merely posting to criticize the board. A list showing over 500. Five Hundred whiners who have infiltrated themselves amongst us. I also have over 79 e-mails in support of my position. These people, afraid of the wrath of the Whiners, support me in secret! You must elect me Uber-Mod so that I can protect you from these… monsters wrapped in human skin!
Fenris, with the ever popular “Appeal to Invisible Authority”
<Max Smart voice>
Wouldja believe…200 whiners?
</Max Smart voice>
<Max Smart voice>
Wouldja believe 27 whiners and a sniveller?
</Max Smart voice>