Why was kirkrapine banned?

I definitely don’t agree with kirkrapine about some issues, and (s)he did open a lot of threads in a short period of time. But a cursory look at the posting history and this sub-forum failed to net any public moderator actions at all, let alone a banning.

I noted that a minstrel thread was locked but I cannot see any official notes in that thread, so perhaps a moderator post is hidden by mistake. Perhaps I just beat the moderators to the post. Or maybe I missed it.

Just curious, since I have participated in a couple of kirkrapine’s threads in Great Debates.

~Max

PM a mod directly if you wish to inquire about a banning.

IME posters who have not been here very long rarely get a public explanation for banishment.

Usually when a poster gets banned, most people can see the obvious reasons. But there were no obvious reasons with kirkrapine (at least none I saw). So other posters can legitimately wonder what the offense was if only out of concern of avoiding committing the same offense.

No reason = sock, everyone knows it even if no mod will say it.

That, and even before he was banned, dude had a fuckload of threads closed, not just the minstrel one.

“Don’t be a sock” seems like it would be trivially easy to abide by, no concern warranted.

Doesn’t it depend on the specific reason for banning? Trolling and jerkery generally get pointed out, either in a dedicated banning announcement or in-thread. Socks and spammers OTOH typically get disappeared with no explanation. For this reason I’m guessing “sock” in this case.

If DCnDC is right, this thread can be closed, at which time I will privately message a moderator for reasons Little Nemo has listed. I might also make a separate thread asking for a change in ban notification policy, at least for new and active posters such as kirkrapine.

I suspect it may have been the number of new threads created, maybe kirkrapine was warned in private to slow down or some automatic anti-spam system was triggered.

~Max

What the hell for? There’s nothing wrong with the current policy - hell, they don’t owe us an explanation even if it’s a long-time poster being banned, that much less for some irritating newb. Do you really need a notification any time a trock is banned? Really?

With the state of message boards it might be good for ad revenue to let back in the banned. It might quintuple the content.

Seems to me that takes a pretty dim view of the moderators. I would like to think that the moderators are not laying traps and lurking in the shadows to catch us when we’re not looking.

‘Established’ posters get a thread when they’re banned as a courtesy to those of us who are curious. Posters banned silently were socks or spammers.

Not really, because I can guarantee you’d lose two good posters for every banned poster who returns.

People were banned for good reasons.

And message boards are dying for natural reasons. Arguing with the weather only gets you wetter.

Respectfully, I would like to wait for an official response to this thread before continuing that discussion (in another thread). Even if the official response is that they will not answer the titular question.

~Max

He was a sock.

In other news, bears shit in the woods.

Thank you, asked and answered.

~Max

I wondered about this myself, so I sent a mod a PM. I got a quick answer. It was the answer I suspected.

I’ve been around here a long time. Here’s a quick hint. If a newish poster is BANNED for no obvious reason, with no explanation, look in your sock drawer. That’s where you’ll find them.

Thread closed.