… and more specifically his/her banishment. At least to me. This poster has been here all of a week. I’ve read (cursively, I’ll admit) his/her posts and honestly didn’t find anything offensive in any of them. Actually, I found the ideas expressed both well-articulated and quite reasonably presented on the whole. Moreover, said poster has not been reprimanded once to my knowledge, at least publicly.
If something else has been going on off the boards, that might be a different situation altogether. But should it not be the case, would any one of the mods or administrators care to enlighten me/us? Not questioning the decision, just a bit puzzled.
This was a new name for an old poster, who had been banned before. In fact, it seems that MOST of the bannings we do is for repeat offenders. If you don’t see a reason, generally it’s because it’s an old troll returning.
Lynn When a previously banned poster returns, I assume you catch them eventually thru their IP adress. Do you always then report them to their ISP? If not, why not. I assume you do as a routine matter. Thanks for a reply.
samclem, sometimes we catch them with IP numbers. More often, though, it’s a combination of things. Posting style is very reliable. Sometimes we report to the ISPs, sometimes we don’t. Some ISPs are good about policing their members, some aren’t. We do the best we can, and generally tailor the actions to the situation.
I wondered myself, after seeing the “BANNED” on the name and digging up the rather inoffensive posts under that name. Thanks for the answer. Usually, it seems your returning trouble makers are blatently obvious. Although you haven’t told us who this is, and what they did to get ousted the first time, I’d think you might let it slide, if they seemed willing to behave themselves in their new identity. Still, your boards, your perogative.
We’ve been over the “IP blocking” territory many times, of course. Too many people on dial up, using public facilities, dynamic IP’s and corporate proxy servers for it to be very reliable. Not to mention that I suspect your REAL troublemakers also get in trouble with their ISP’s on a regular basis, and switch accounts at the drop of a hat.
I used to be a believer in the ‘reformed troll’ theory myself, but reading this thread and seeing how the boards are run I’m having doubts. I see it as a slippery-slope problem. If the mods allow a few trolls back, people who re-register contrary to the rules and then play ball our way, the others who just want to cause problems will just have more things to point to when they go on “The SDMB’s been mean to me” tirades. Also, the trolls we allow back could relapse into old behavior patterns, causing more stress for the people here. We can ill afford particularly active one-time losers. Recidivism might break us.
I think you have pinpointed the problem, but just missed the solution. What would lower the stress a lot would be to do this: a) State the policy that “Bannings, thread locking, thread deletion, etc. are all just judgement calls at the time and will never be undone or explained- When the umpire calls an out there is no point running the instant replay.” b) State that “SDMB’s been mean to me” tirades will be deleted- Yes, that is censorship, we do have censors, and it’s just to lower the collective noise level c) State that troll threads will be deleted. (And don’t tell me we can’t for legal reasons- many have been deleted by Lynn, some just this week, and so just state it will be done and do it.) d) Also, just state once and for all that “feeding trolls” includes ALL response, including posting “DNFTT” and swearing, and breastbeating about how you fell for the sob story and now will not trust the next sob story- Just say that stuff only gives the troll some response.
In summary, just have a Zero Level policy on review of any policy- state “Every umpire’s decision is final. We don’t care about judicial analysis, we want to move on, we just do what makes sense at the time, and don’t want to see it debated. At all. Period.”
We have, on a few occasions, deliberately let a previously-banned person back in. All of those cases have a few things in common: First, the banned person admitted to his or her past wrongdoings. Second, the person apologized for them. Third, the person asked our permission before coming back. When a person just suddenlystarts posing again under a new name, without having done any of those things, I can guarantee you that they’re not “reformed”.
Like umpires, we do make mistakes occasionally. Unlike umpires, we’re willing to admit it, and correct our mistakes. Many times, though, all that the trolls provide us is yet more evidence that we were, in fact, right in the first place.
Any decision a human being makes is a “judgement call.” The minute we moderate this board using a complex banning algorithm in place of human intervention then we’ll add that tidbit of info to the FAQ.
Well there’s an “Alphagene’s been mean to me” tirade available for public viewing in the Pit. Not deleted. Not censored. The more gratuitous crap (usually leveled at UncleBeer or Coldie, for some reason) tends to be deleted, but those aren’t complaints. That’s just a high pitched whine.
We don’t have a zero-tolerance policy at all. If anything, we give posters the benefit of the doubt in just about every scenario. We occasionally take actions that are on the surface confusing to some posters, but we are very open to discussing why we do what we do.
You seem to have taken my post wrong- It wasn’t ironic at all, it was an actual suggestion of how to solve the problem.
I don’t think trolls need to be given extra chances- I am suggesting that threads like this one are counterproductive.
I’m suggesting that you have a policy of not debating the decisions you made. I’m suggesting you just tell omni-not, etc. that you don’t want to review or discuss bannings because it gives attention to the troll, giving him extra mileage from his posts.
You say “We don’t have a zero-tolerance policy at all.” That’s not something I was complaining about. Quite the opposite, I was suggesting it. I suggest you should have a zero-tolerance policy for all things troll. Remove the fake dying relative thread, and also remove the threads where the poster or “their friend” cries censorship, and also remove all the threads where people debate those moves. I suggest you have a new policy of not letting trolls, banning, whining about trolls, whining about banning, anything troll-related remain. I suggest you take a zero-tolerance stance to all troll-authored and troll-derivative threads.
I know this sounds impossible here, but I assure you that is exactly how most boards get rid of trolls. If their own words disappear quickly, and the reactions they were trolling for disappear, and outrage about “how dare they play with our sympathy” disappears, and the “not to complain but why did you ban him” disappear, then what’s left for his as payback. Nothing. And he moves on to greener pastures.
Nearly all of our Teemsters are our friends, and you want your friends to know and understand. So sometimes our need to be your friend overrides our need to do the right thing and just shut up about it.
We’re sensitive to the fact that we are working on your trust and we don’t ever want to leave you with the feeling that we have abused that trust in any way.
“Never explain, never complain” is the way to be sometimes, but we’re all too human and want that little stroke of reassurance that people grok what we’re about.
