Don’t kick them, just burning their dog.
Some actions merit instabans. So setting aside points already made, the OP’s proposal at best requires modification.
Asking to be banned brings you close to instaban territory. If somebody wants to be banned, I see no reason why they shouldn’t be obliged.
The only caveat I would add is that if I were a mod, I might look more charitably at an application for unbanning. I might waive the 1-3 year guideline (if it exists - I can’t remember). Petition for banning would still need to show an understanding of the importance of moderation in fighting ignorance, etc. Butthurt petitions won’t merit approval.
The idea is to address folks who are having a temporary issue, one that the poster is capable of learning from and moving on from. I somehow doubt whether my caveat applies in this instance.
Some posters have entered a difficult spell in their lives, and have requested a leave of absence from the board, to eliminate the temptation of posting here when they really shouldn’t. Props to them: they show an unusual degree of self knowledge and courtesy.
If anything, I think long time members should be given less leeway, since they’ve been here long enough to know the rules, as opposed to newer members.
As a long-time poster, it’s my experience that it’s rare for any poster with an established record to be banned. But like a player being thrown out of a baseball game, sometimes it just has to be done. Hell, Cal Ripkin, Jr. was thrown out of games three times in his career and Lou Gehrig was tossed once.
As for not announcing the ban in ATMB, in this case the incident itself played out in ATMB. It’s still here if you want to read it.
Well, depends – is the dog really ugly?
Well spoken sir. You tell those ruffians and ne’er-do-wells.
Or small and yappy so you can get good height and distance?
Exactly. It sounds like in this case there was a lot more going on than we know, too. “Abusive emails to mods” should be an INSTABAN and I’m sorry the mods had to deal with that BS!!
Each case is unique and I trust the mods to do the right thing.
I may be understanding, but I think you actually make a great case for a suspension to (almost) always precede a ban.
By acknowledging their long-time participation here, you acknowledge their basic and equally long-standing SDMB decency.
And yet you’d revoke their privileges unfailingly for a single transgression.
Okay.
It depends on the circumstances.
Sometimes, it’s a long-time poster who has been generally good and maybe has lost his head for a moment (I know it happens to me occasionally). Then you might start with a suspension.
Sometimes the poster has been around for a long time and has routinely piled up warnings and seems not to be learning a lesson despite many changes. Then it might make sense to go straight to a ban.
Every circumstance is different, and so far I’ve seen the mods being quite judicious about how to apply suspensions and bans. I see no need for a blanket rule.
Indeed, I agree.
In my post I was assuming that a history of such misbehavior did not exist.
Sometimes a transgression is so extreme, there’s no need for a suspension.
I agree. If you insult a moderator in public and send abusive PMs to other mods, (as ** AnthonyElite** is said to have done) I assume you’re no longer interested in being a member, no matter what your past behavior is.
That is NOT what I said. Don’t put words in my mouth.
I do not disagree with anything you’ve said.
However, I would personally have liked to see this said in some sort of ban announcement. Usually you give one for posters who are considered “long term posters.” Is there a reason one was not given?
Don’t get me wrong: I entirely approve of the appropriate smackdown you gave as your last post in that thread. I just was surprised by the lack of a(n additional) formal announcement.
After reading the discussion to that point, I believed you were advocating for a ban without notice when you said, “If anything, I think long time members should be given less leeway”. Apologies. Evidently, I misinterpreted you.
Agreed.
This isn’t a case of a long-term member suddenly being banned for behavior s/he had reason to expect was allowable. This was suicide by mod, explicitly stated in the thread.
As to why no announcement - I’ve been traveling a bit and have been doing most things from my phone. As a result, some of the housekeeping stuff is a bit more cumbersome, like posting up the links to warnings, etc. I figured the activity in the thread itself was sufficient, as well as the relatively few posts by the poster in question.
I disagree. If I see a post in with “banned” under the username, I want to know why that person was banned. I go to ATMB and look for the usual** [Username] has been banned** thread. Searching his posting history, looking for warnings is much more time-consuming. For that reason there should always be an announcement. Not everybody will have seen the flame out.