I don’t know. There have been 62 unique posters to this thread alone (if you count me now and don’t count Marley) and only one of them has said that this was the right call. I know we think that there are tens of thousands of unique users on this board every day, but honestly, when 60+ of your regular board members say you did the wrong thing, maybe you should listen.
This was beyond a bad call and the administration of the board should be ashamed of themselves that they let their egos get so badly bruised that they would react so spitefully and irrationally.
In looking at Seven’s posts over the last few months, two activities show up: snark about Liberal, complain about the board, snark about Liberal, complain about the board. You have to go back to March to find a significant number of posts from Seven about anything else.
We welcome feedback and complaints about the moderating here and we sure as hell don’t expect everyone to like everyone else. If most of what you are doing here is complaining or attack other posters, that’s not so welcome.
We give people a lot of chances here, including high numbers of warnings and even multiple suspensions in some cases. If somebody wants to participate here but can’t control his temper, for example, we remain optimistic they can learn. A suspension is a (usually last) warning that you need to keep the rules in mind. When you are dealing with someone who knows the rules and has made clear he doesn’t care, there’s no point in sending this message. Seven’s activities over the weekend and the sig were one more signal he was just here to be antagonistic and play games with the rules. Seven sometimes pretended he didn’t know what the rules were, or for that matter how to turn on signature when he runs a vBulletin system himself, but we’re not required to accept those explanations when they’re not credible. And I don’t think his excuses were believable at all.
At least two, actually: Shodan and I. I didn’t bother reading pages 2-5 so if there are any more in there I haven’t counted them.
These threads are self-selecting. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a banning/suspension thread where more than one or two people agreed with the decision; people who agree don’t need to say anything.
In any case, as I said, most people just don’t care, and that’s borne out by the fact that out of 10,000 or whatever active users, only 60ish have said anything at all.
Speaking of things which are clear, yet missed, the point is that hardly any of TTM&F have enough of an opinion to comment, so it’s not as though people are all up in arms about this, as you imply.
Again, as noted above, at least two of those who do have an opinion do not agree.
I still think suspension would be more appropriate then banning in this case. If Seven used to make positive contributions but has fallen into a pattern of bad behaviour, doesn’t that increase the appropriateness of temporary suspension? Falling back into good habits is easier than learning them from scratch.
More like around 200 people who actually post with any sort of regularity, of which 60 have posted within this thread. That’s about 30% of the posting base thinking this was the worst decision in the history of decision making, and 1% who agree with it.
To all those who agree with the banning and don’t post, there’s a proportionate number who do agree with it and don’t post, for fear of being put on some sort of secret trouble makers list.
Marley, I appreciate you taking the time to come back to this.
I disagree, pretty much entirely with your assessment of Seven’s intentions. Particularly, once he was directly told to stop commenting on the snarkpit issue, he did. Even to the point where he didn’t defend himself against mischaracterisations of his intentions – to me that speaks to a poster who could be ‘reformed’ by a suspension (not that I think he needed any reforming, but to use your own logic, he showed a willingness to abide by sanctions put on him and now you’re saying he wasn’t given the courtesy of a suspension because you had no confidence he would change? Weak).
But let’s ignore that for the moment, because I’d like one straight forward question answered in a straight forward manner, if you will:
why was Seven consider jerkish for quoting Tuba in his sig but Tuba not considered jerkish, and warned, for saying what she said?
Lately (as in this year) it has not at all felt like the moderator team has welcomed feedback and complaints. You might want to take that under consideration. I had very few reason to complain in the past but more this year sadly. When I did complain in the past, I did feel the feedback was welcomed. The environment has become more hostile here or so it feels.
I know in the past, the Admins did reverse themselves on the Ellis Dee banning. I’m not sure if Seven really cares or not, but you might want to consider changing this banning to a suspension.
This is worthless. You may as well have not said anything. Fair enough, **Seven **may have been antagonistic but the final straw in a banning incident should be an actual breaking of Da Rulez. Which, I understand, **Seven **didn’t actually do.
Then please reinforce this by banning Shodan immediately, as he consistently attacks, belittles and insults other posters to the exclusion of any other activity.
Indeed, Reeder garnered 8 warnings and a suspension. lissener at least six AND was both suspended and banned and came back. Shodan has garnered so many warnings he doesn’t even take them seriously anymore if he did to begin with. But Seven banned for the unspeakable; he disagreed with the way the board was being run and wasn’t afraid to say so frequently.
Let us also address your assertion that 7 ‘pretended’ not to know the rules. His post elsewhere (because you’re certainly not going to allow him to answer the charge here):
That was posted last night 6pm CDT. Amazing clairvoyance, no? Very close to what you posted.
I realize you’re enforcing the rules and this is what you have collectively decided. I am equally cognizant that it is not an easy position in which to be. But you are doing yourselves no favors by reinforcing bad decisions with justifications. If it comes down to a banning because he pissed you (or someone) off, say so. That position I could at least respect. As it is, I find this on a par with one of Shodan’s weaselly explanations.
The majority of my posts since ‘The Unpleasantness’ have been complaining about the board too. Has that become a bannable offense?
Jesus Christ, the man made a mistake. He didn’t pretend he didn’t know how to turn on sigs, he forgot to check the box to display his sig. He said: "Hey,. why doesn’t my sig line show up? " then in the next post said: “Oh, show signatures was turned off in my UserCP.” How is that ‘[pretending to not know] how to turn on signature?’
You’re really reaching here.
Regards (and I mean that in the insulting way Shodan says it),
-tool
*Bolding and snippage of above quote was done by me.
Don’t quote me on this, but I’m willing to bet that there are a ton of other posters who have 100+ posts involving complaining about or pitting Liberal.
I’ve yet to see a banning which has attracted an appreciable percentage of however many people are active on this board. I’ve also yet to see a banning of a genuine troll in which fewer than a couple of people agreed with the decision.
Whether or not these threads are self selecting, there often is a feeling of “good riddance to bad rubbish” when trolls are kicked out. At least amongst a decent minority.