Another 'banning' thread - please read question before voting in the poll.

[ManlyBanisters]

I've just re-read the TOS after recent banning shenanigans. I won't mention specific cases because I can't, and don't, claim to know all the facts.

My question is this - If somebody is posting under multiple accounts and is not being abusive, trolling or answering their own posts should they be banned just for being deceptive?

I guess I'm saying, what is considered disruptive? If I create a second account to post as a gay man because I get my jollies that way* should I be banned?

Here's the section of the ToS I'm talking about:

Accounts- Members here are discouraged from having multiple accounts. We realize that sometimes several members of a family will use the same computer and we encourage that. However, if a member sets up multiple accounts to post from for the purpose of disrupting the board, that will be considered trolling. Members who post from multiple accounts for the purpose of trolling the board will be banned without warning.

* That's theoretical - I neither do that, nor do I get my jollies that way.:smile:

 

[ManlyBanisters]

Freddie53 and myself have been busy making a post to help clear things up a little, it can be found http://www.lpsg.org/the-help-desk/53047-an-explaination-of-bannings.html.

We'd ask, plead, beg that any questions be left in that thread so we can keep it all together in one place. Too many threads about one thing is going to lead to missing things and repeating things, best have it all neat and tidy

I'm not really asking a question of the Mods here, I'm not just interested in Mod opinion or ToS rules - I put the poll up to get a feel for what the members thought about this part of the ToS.

Most people will realise what case prompted this - but I have to emphasise that I'm not just talking about one case.

 

[biguy2738]

Right, so I've cast my vote and now I will head over to thread that Kotch very kindly included as a link - STAR!

 

[ManlyBanisters]

Only 19 people (including me) have an opinion?! Come on!

 

[biguy2738]

I think its more of a case that most just want to stay out of the politics of the board. If you read up on any of the banning or ToS threads you'll see that very few people actually take part.

This is disappointing, it means that if we (the mods) ever try to get things sorted, try to get suggestions and work them into the restrictions we have to work within, then we only ever have a small selection of opinions (I'd put money on there being far more input if we were to rewrite the ToS in a way people disagreed with) to work with.

Let it be known Kotchanski that I have a great deal of respect and admiration for you. You faced the "firing squad" for lack of a better word yesterday in the thread where banning is explained etc. Despite the amount of heat, you kept your cool and conducted yourself in a very cool and dignified manner. That already caused me to gain a lot of respect for you.

Your approach in this thread today, where you are open to and even encouraging members to express their opinions about such a touchy subject, especially after yesterday's experience says a great deal about you and your ability to fulfill your role as a moderator.

I am thankful that we have moderators like you on this board and thank you for the way you fulfill your role in such a responsible, open and dignified manner. I am truly grateful.

 

[Lex]

I'm not really asking a question of the Mods here, I'm not just interested in Mod opinion or ToS rules - I put the poll up to get a feel for what the members thought about this part of the ToS.

Most people will realise what case prompted this - but I have to emphasise that I'm not just talking about one case.

You've been here for 3 months. Most of us have been here since before there was a ToS (this is the 2nd version of the ToS). If you sat back and watched and forum and got to know the community, enforcement of the rules will seem pretty clear.

 

[ManlyBanisters]

You've been here for 3 months. Most of us have been here since before there was a ToS (this is the 2nd version of the ToS). If you sat back and watched and forum and got to know the community, enforcement of the rules will seem pretty clear.

So the ToS is only for the established members?

 

[rawbone8]

So the ToS is only for the established members?

No. Feel free to continue. Ignore any attempts to chill the exchange of ideas based on a pecking order. That's one person's opinion, so take it as such. I value your efforts to generate discussion, as you have been very positive and open about it. It's all about making the place better, so let's not try to curtail anything.

A lot of effort went into the writing of the ToS and for that I am grateful to the mod team. That said, it is not sacrosanct either.



MB: I like what you've added to the site since you've joined. :biggrin1:

 

[ManlyBanisters]

No. Feel free to continue. Ignore any attempts to chill the exchange of ideas based on a pecking order. That's one person's opinion, so take it as such. I value your efforts to generate discussion, as you have been very positive and open about it. It's all about making the place better, so let's not try to curtail anything.

A lot of effort went into the writing of the ToS and for that I am grateful to the mod team. That said, it is not sacrosanct either.



MB: I like what you've added to the site since you've joined. :biggrin1:

Thanks rawbone - I really must design the ultimate 'pithy, but not spiteful, sarcasm' emoticon :wink:

No seriously - thanks for the back up - I don't believe in pecking orders - I don't believe in running in hand flailing and trying to chage everything before I know the score either - but I do think Lex was being elitist, whether he intended to or not.

 

[Gillette]

Option #1. is not clear .

"Yes, anyone posting with more than one account should be banned"

I would remind that by posting this means multiple accounts in use concurrently.

This does not apply to changing accounts (ie. dropping one for valid reasons to begin a new one) as they would not be active at the same time.

This should have been a separate option on your poll, since some who may have voted have been in such a position. Not having this as a separate selection stacks the poll in favour of the second option.

 

[ManlyBanisters]

Option #1. is not clear .

"Yes, anyone posting with more than one account should be banned"

I would remind that by posting this means multiple accounts in use concurrently.

This does not apply to changing accounts (ie. dropping one for valid reasons to begin a new one) as they would not be active at the same time.

This should have been a separate option on your poll, since some who may have voted have been in such a position. Not having this as a separate selection stacks the poll in favour of the second option.

Well - It wasn't designed to weight the poll in favour of any option.

When I said 'posting' I meant what you have interpreted - I meant concurrent posting - or at very least when the user intends to come back to the 'primary' account - cases where the primary/initial account is not dead.

Apologies for any confusion - I would hope that my thread opening post, specifically "My question is this - If somebody is posting under multiple accounts and is not being abusive, trolling or answering their own posts should they be banned just for being deceptive?" helped put the poll questions in the context I intended. That's why I put 'please read...' in the title - but fucked it up and typoed because I'm a bit of an arse sometimes :biggrin1:

 

[Big Dreamer]

.........but fucked it up and typoed because I have a perfect, round and firm arse all the time :biggrin1:

You fucked up your last sentence so I fixed it for you, ManlyB.

 

[ManlyBanisters]

You fucked up your last sentence so I fixed it for you, ManlyB.

#
The bigger the cushion, the sweeter the pushin'
That's what I said
The looser the waistband, the deeper the quicksand
Or so I have read
#

:biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1:

 

[Big Dreamer]

#
The bigger the cushion, the sweeter the pushin'
That's what I said
The looser the waistband, the deeper the quicksand
Or so I have read
#

:biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1:

Regardless of the subject, Spinal Tap can always offer a few words of wisdom. :smile:

 

[Gillette]

Well - It wasn't designed to weight the poll in favour of any option.

I don't think it was concious, Hon, but I think unconciously it may have been.

Look at your wording of the second option.

"No, only those being overtly abusive to others should be banned"

Is subtle abuse OK? At what point does it become overt?

The better question is how do you determine when someone has abused multiple accounts or to what degree, when you don't know that they have multiple accounts in the first place?

I understand where you're coming from and I don't wish to fight with you. I just wish to address areas that the poll does not cover clearly.

 

[ManlyBanisters]

I understand where you're coming from and I don't wish to fight with you. I just wish to address areas that the poll does not cover clearly.

Absolutely - and that's why there's the thread to go with - no one ever nails the question (or the answers) in the poll options, in my experience.

It's hard to argue against your 'unconscious' comment* - I'm still of the opinion my post gives enough information for most people to see what the questions and the answers are driving at. And 'abuse' and 'disrupt' are ambiguous, open to interpretation and argument - that's why the ToS needs to be rephrased...

*Still - I guess I could have had a Freudian moment, I often say one thing and mean my mother, oops, I mean another :wink:

 

[B_Hickboy]

The questions are at once subjective and vague. You will get the same kind of answers.

 

[B_big dirigible]

It's all about making the place better

Even getting agreement on a basic concept like this has been an uphill battle. At least some others are finally noticing that some change might be a good idea.

 

[B_big dirigible]

(I'd put money on there being far more input if we were to rewrite the ToS in a way people disagreed with) to work with.

I don't think anybody would notice. I doubt that three dozen members have ever read the present one. The TOS is like the weather - everyone talks about it, but ...

 

[ManlyBanisters]

The questions are at once subjective and vague. You will get the same kind of answers.

So is this section of the ToS...

Anyway - I disagree, subjective, maybe - vague - no. I clarify the context of the poll in the thread opening post. If there is part of it you don't understand or would like me to expand on I'd be happy to do so.