Previous warnings exist as well. A review of his recent posting history revealed a nearly exclusive focus on criticizing the board and/or other posters.
This decision was reached after review by both moderators and administrators. CarnalK was advised by e-mail, along with a final warning that his behavior must not continue when he allowed to post again.
Well, I commend you all for attempting a modification of the policy to include a broader range of options (I am assuming that this reflects such a move) in addition to banning. I hope that it works out well for both the members and administration.
I’m pleased to see a suspension being used. I hope he takes the opportunity to think. Might I also suggest that the title read SUSPENDED rather than BANNED?
The idea was suggested by posters, was endorsed fairly universally and struck the staff as reasonable as well. We’re still tightening the nuts and checking the bolts, and the ‘suspended’ title is one of them. Agreed, it’s not really accurate so we’re working on it.
This is the first time we’re trying a suspension. Basically, it will happen if we think the poster will see the error of his/her ways with a brief “time out.”
