And here I thought you wanted taser prods coming from mods.
Different high-voltage strokes for different folks, I guess.
You’re scary, Lynn. 
It seems rather inconsistent to me.
For example, pseudotriton ruber ruber has eight warnings and a suspension on his record, and he hasn’t been banned. But Simple Linctus was banned after five (four not counting the warning issued as a result of calling pchaos’s office) and a suspension.
[QUOTE=Ed Zotti]
Warning
prr, we’ve had it with your endless whining. You’ve had eight warnings and a suspension. If you whine about anything ever again, or violate any rule even slightly, or do anything we consider remotely jerklike, we’ll ban you without further notice.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Marley23]
Recently Simple Linctus Pitted another poster for (in his opinion) pretending to be a lawyer. (He had also questioned the poster’s credentials here.) A fair amount of information about that poster was discussed in the thread because the poster chose to disclose it on the SDMB or on other websites. Simple Linctus decided to take this a step further by calling an office number he believed belonged to that poster, leaving a “code word,” and asking the poster to call back to confirm his identity. While the phone call itself (obviously) didn’t take place on the message board, it was pursuant to an SDMB thread and the call was disclosed on the board.
After some discussion the staff concluded that in addition to being transparently stupid, this was a violation of the “Don’t be a jerk” rule. The attempt is an invasion of privacy. Simple Linctus’s phone message doesn’t sound threatening based on his description, but we don’t want arguments on the board to turn into any kind of real-life problem or harassment or stalking. The line between those things blurs if we countenance posters taking SDMB arguments off the board this way. We’ve always discouraged people from taking off-board fights to the SDMB, and taking SDMB disputes off the board as Simple Linctus did is also discouraged.
The staff decided to give Simple Linctus a formal warning for his actions, and if he’s had no other rules violations (or few) we would have let it go at that. However he also received four other warnings in late 2012 culminating in a suspension in November. Based on that track record and this latest warning, we’ve banned him.
[/QUOTE]
Links for proof:
:dubious:
This is just silly. Not all violations are the same. Some are more serious than others. What would be crazy is if the mods didn’t differentiate based on the details.
Right. A very long time ago I think the mods had a kind of absolute “three strikes” policy, but as time went on that made less and less sense. These days we often judge based on patterns of behavior: three warnings over the course of many years probably isn’t a big deal, but three in a month or two probably is. Most of our users don’t have any warnings at all, but of the people who do, we are more understanding of someone who slips up on very rare occasions over a long time than someone who breaks the rules over and over in a short time.
I was about to leave a post saying yeah, calling someone’s office like that is probably a lot worse than whining.
Although in a perfect world, all criminal offenses, be they felonies or misdemeanors, would be death-penalty offenses. First-degree murder, you get the chair. Jaywalking, you get the chair. It would sure cut down on some of the riff-raff.
And repeat offenders. Except for that pesky Jesus fellow.
We’re going to need a lot more chairs.
Not the comfy chair?
No one would expect that.
I remember Collounsbury was banned, promised good behavior, unbanned, quickly fell back into skating on the edge and was banned again. I miss him as a poster but it’s hard to run a civilized board if there are wildly different rules for some posters than others.
Christ, it’s been almost a decade since he’s been banned.
Not really. Four chairs, no waiting.
It will take at least five.
Bring Otto back. He was cool.
–Cliffy
We also have to look at frequencies and patterns. Someone who goofs up and gets warned every couple of years for ten years isn’t the same as someone who joins the boards and accumulates five warnings in five days.