Banning notification (spunoff from "Be part of the solution" thread.)

[simcha]

Sorry - to be completely transparent - what I mean is, that it should have absolutely no relevance what you are, who you are, who you like to fuck, what colour you are, what age you are, what religion you are, what nationality you are etc etc etc, it is rather what makes us all the same, namely that we like being here, and those who sadly no longer have that choice. This is what the Moderating team should represent and uphold. Not a list of rules, no matter how well written and thought through.

RobE needs to know this and act upon it.

Amen!

The spirit of the rules should be followed out of what is best for the site, not necessarily the letter of the rules out of what the moderators feel about certain people and statements at the time.

Moderation should be consistent and present, not distant and capricious.

And I've been a moderator more than once on a very busy board before. Yes, it's a thankless job, get used to it. It's one of the reasons I don't do it anymore. One thing I had to do was to remember to be objective even when a member had made me angry or some of my friends angry on the board. I wasn't perfect. I was transparent.

I did let my membership know what was going on and why even when it was unpopular and I felt that I'd rather avoid explaining myself. Staying out of threads that asked me to explain myself did not help the situation at all. All it did was create a resentment between the members and the moderation team.

So, what is this moderation team going to do to avoid the massive mistakes it has made in the past few weeks? That's what I'd like to hear. I've heard plenty from membership about what we are changing amongst ourselves. Now it's time for the moderators to step up and speak out.

Oh, and it's not acceptable to leave a necessary tool of the banning process broken for years. The least the moderators could have done was E-Mail the members who were being warned about the bans. Since the internal tool was broken, the moderators should try the old-fashioned way of reaching members, by e-mail. All of us have to have a working email address to be on this site. Use it.

 

[Drifterwood]

I think there is a little bit of a bias peeking out here. What has the bolded portion to do with moderator selection?

If you wish me to go through the ToS point by point to explain how I think it does this I will but it won't be until tomorrow when I have the time.

Some here are focusing upon the effect, I am interested in looking at the cause.

The recent happenings have underlined the inherent weakness of having rules set in stone, supported by a limited number of sanctions.

Clever trolls can push and push the rules without ever fully crossing the line. This is troll heaven because they get all the attention they crave. A true member can have a bad day or inadvertently cross the line and bang they're gone.

The answer is to have a range of sanctions (as used renetly). Quality members will take their punishment and come back. Trolls lose the very thing that keeps them here and will move on to be fed somewhere else.

I think that TOS should be guidelines in whose hands we trust a moderating team that is cohesive in its purpose of maintaining the culture of the site.

"In line with the guidelines of the Terms of Service and in the interest of this site, the Moderating Team have decided ......................"

is IMO the way to run an adult playground, not

"The TOS have been broken and therefore........................"

I am not going to criticise a Mod for acting as in example two, because that is the way it is at present. I think it should be different, as in the first example. Then we could accept that there is flexibility and even that the Mods are human beings.

If you want me to leave this site, then please go through the TOS point by point :smile:, we all have our breaking point under torture.

 

[ManlyBanisters]

Oh, and it's not acceptable to leave a necessary tool of the banning process broken for years. The least the moderators could have done was E-Mail the members who were being warned about the bans. Since the internal tool was broken, the moderators should try the old-fashioned way of reaching members, by e-mail. All of us have to have a working email address to be on this site. Use it.

I made this point in a thread before and it was answered (by mindseye) quite reasonably - LPSG members are given the option in their CP to select whether they wish to receive emails from the membership, from just Buddies and Mods/Admins or from no one. I have my settings on 'receive mail from no one' so the admin team would have had to go against that stated preference to contact me about my ban.

I still think a redirect to 'You're banned' on screen is the best way to go - then the member in question can go about contacting the mods for an explaination through outside channels, other members or whatever. Or, better yet, on the 'You're banned' page have an option 'Click here if you would like an explanation of your ban sent to your registered email address'. Of course there are quite a few underage and spamming bans that we never notice - I have no idea whether it would be possible to automate those responses and save the mods some time.

 

[Gillette]

Some here are focusing upon the effect, I am interested in looking at the cause.

The recent happenings have underlined the inherent weakness of having rules set in stone, supported by a limited number of sanctions.

Clever trolls can push and push the rules without ever fully crossing the line. This is troll heaven because they get all the attention they crave. A true member can have a bad day or inadvertently cross the line and bang they're gone.

The answer is to have a range of sanctions (as used renetly). Quality members will take their punishment and come back. Trolls lose the very thing that keeps them here and will move on to be fed somewhere else.

I think that TOS should be guidelines in whose hands we trust a moderating team that is cohesive in its purpose of maintaining the culture of the site.

"In line with the guidelines of the Terms of Service and in the interest of this site, the Moderating Team have decided ......................"

is IMO the way to run an adult playground, not

"The TOS have been broken and therefore........................"

I am not going to criticise a Mod for acting as in example two, because that is the way it is at present. I think it should be different, as in the first example. Then we could accept that there is flexibility and even that the Mods are human beings.

If you want me to leave this site, then please go through the TOS point by point :smile:, we all have our breaking point under torture.

You've just saved me heaps of typing. Bless you.:smile:

I see your point and the subtle distinction, but I have to question if that would work. Even when we are acting as in the second example we are perceived to be acting as the first example and slammed for it as favoritism.

"The Big Time-Out" could be viewed as an instance of the first example and we lost one notable quality member who wasn't even touched by it because they didn't agree with that solution.

The problem with a site this large and diverse is that there will always be one group or another that will disagree with the way it is run. And the group that does disagree is certain to be the most vocal.

Flipping what P.T. Barnum said:
You can please all of the people some of the time.
You can please some of the people all of the time.
You can't please all of the people all of the time.

I'm not even sure the first two can be applied here.

It's a pity that there are conditions being placed on our being accepted as human beings. We are anyway. Always have been. Whether others choose to acknowledge it or not.

 

[Northland]

It's a pity that there are conditions being placed on our being accepted as human beings. We are anyway. Always have been. Whether others choose to acknowledge it or not.

Which is why, this site, as is the case on some other sites, would benefit greatly from a cloaking device. The moderators would exist, and could be contacted; however, nobody would know who they were. There would be no list of moderators by name, and no special marker beneath their name to indicate a status. If one needed a moderator, they would press a 'notify moderator' button-much akin to the report bad post (the ! symbol over to the left in the gold color). In this manner, moderators could do their jobs without the random attacks on them and they would still be able to interact with all the members of the board; never needing to wonder if their stating a belief or opinion, would raise the ire of hundreds and generate dozens of pages of attacks.

 

[novice_btm]

...Oh, and it's not acceptable to leave a necessary tool of the banning process broken for years. The least the moderators could have done was E-Mail the members who were being warned about the bans. Since the internal tool was broken, the moderators should try the old-fashioned way of reaching members, by e-mail. All of us have to have a working email address to be on this site. Use it.

I made this point in a thread before...

There seems to be a lot of that going around with this topic: http://www.lpsg.org/78730-the-night-of-long-knives-14.html#post1327145

 

[simcha]

OK, so I forgot about the "no email" option... Oooops... Then fix the on-site tool for notification then.

 

[D_Gunther Snotpole]

I made this point in a thread before and it was answered (by mindseye) quite reasonably - LPSG members are given the option in their CP to select whether they wish to receive emails from the membership, from just Buddies and Mods/Admins or from no one. I have my settings on 'receive mail from no one' so the admin team would have had to go against that stated preference to contact me about my ban.

Why doesn't the material seen while registering give these three choices, as above:
1) willing to receive emails from the membership
2) willing to receive emails from Buddies and Mods/Admins
3) unwilling to receive emails from anyone, except in case of a banning, in which case a statement that the member has been banned (and possibly an explanation) will be sent to the email address given upon registering?

(Members already registered could opt in to this third choice or not, but realize that if they didn't, they would not get a statement that they had been banned, nor an explanation, in that sad eventuality.)

 

[snoozan]

How about a screen when you attempt to login that states that you've been banned, duration of ban, and the reason?

I don't know how difficult that would be, or if there is a similar hack/add on available. But it seems to be the simplest option since Rob_E isn't banning IP addresses, just usernames.

 

[D_Gunther Snotpole]

How about a screen when you attempt to login that states that you've been banned, duration of ban, and the reason?

I don't know how difficult that would be, or if there is a similar hack/add on available. But it seems to be the simplest option since Rob_E isn't banning IP addresses, just usernames.

Makes great sense, snoozan.
And, if doable, must simpler than my suggestion.

 

[ManlyBanisters]

Banned members atempting to log in need to be redirected to a screen that informs them they are banned. Doesn't have to be anything fancy. "Fuck off, mate, you're banned!" and a smilie flipping the bird would be better than nothing.

I still think a redirect to 'You're banned' on screen is the best way to go - then the member in question can go about contacting the mods for an explaination through outside channels, other members or whatever. Or, better yet, on the 'You're banned' page have an option 'Click here if you would like an explanation of your ban sent to your registered email address'. Of course there are quite a few underage and spamming bans that we never notice - I have no idea whether it would be possible to automate those responses and save the mods some time.

How about a screen when you attempt to login that states that you've been banned, duration of ban, and the reason?

I don't know how difficult that would be, or if there is a similar hack/add on available. But it seems to be the simplest option since Rob_E isn't banning IP addresses, just usernames.

Good idea snooz :biggrin1::biggrin1:

Sorry - I realise the two ideas are slightly different - I'm guessing a specific personalized screen for each banned member stating duration and reason is probably harder to do (unless it already exists for vBulletin) - which is why in my 2nd post I suggested a generic *click here* on a generic page because if a redirect page for banned members is possible then it would be no hassle to add that kind of functionality to the page. Also the persoanlized page would require that there be a database of banned members with the various fields needed (username, ban length, ToS section violated and, possibly, additional info) - I know they must have username and ban length figured (because set period bans lift automatically) but I'm not sure about the other info.

 

[SteveHd]

What happens when a banned/suspended member attempts to log in? I'm not being flippant; I simply don't know.

 

[mindseye]

How about a screen when you attempt to login that states that you've been banned, duration of ban, and the reason?

Three days ago, Rob_E wrote,

I am to blame for the lack of notification. [...] I am committed to fixing this, and apologize for the inconvinience.

Let's all assume that this problem will get fixed, okay?

What happens when a banned/suspended member attempts to log in? I'm not being flippant; I simply don't know.

Blank screen.

 

[naughty]

Which is why, this site, as is the case on some other sites, would benefit greatly from a cloaking device. The moderators would exist, and could be contacted; however, nobody would know who they were. There would be no list of moderators by name, and no special marker beneath their name to indicate a status. If one needed a moderator, they would press a 'notify moderator' button-much akin to the report bad post (the ! symbol over to the left in the gold color). In this manner, moderators could do their jobs without the random attacks on them and they would still be able to interact with all the members of the board; never needing to wonder if their stating a belief or opinion, would raise the ire of hundreds and generate dozens of pages of attacks.

What a fabulous idea.

 

[ManlyBanisters]

Three days ago, Rob_E wrote,



Let's all assume that this problem will get fixed, okay?



Blank screen.

You've never been banned, have you dearie :wink:

Steve - in answer to your question you get a 404 / not found type screen (depends on browser of course) - same as you would get if the site was accidentally down.

Sorry mindseye - I hate to be a persistant pernicketer but 'let's all assume this problem will get fixed' is not good enough. The notification has been broken for years. Each time a high profile banning goes down everyone throws their hands up in the air and clucks on about notfication (just like I'm doing, yes) and yet the problem remains. What is wrong with the membership putting some suggestions for a fix in the thread the owner created to get suggestions to fix shit?

And while I'm on the topic - moving these posts to this thread seems unnecessary - especialy all the ones between Drifter and Gillette that are not about banning notification.

 

[mindseye]

You've never been banned, have you dearie :wink:

Steve - in answer to your question you get a 404 / not found type screen (depends on browser of course) - same as you would get if the site was accidentally down.

I've been misinformed, then, and stand corrected. (To answer your question, MB: not from here... )

And while I'm on the topic - moving these posts to this thread seems unnecessary - especialy all the ones between Drifter and Gillette that are not about banning notification.

Some of Drifterwood's posts referenced notification, though he was mostly talking about the style and language that might be used in doing so. My concern was that other suggestions (like the one for flagging photoshopped gallery images) were getting buried.

 

[SteveHd]

Steve - in answer to your question you get a 404 / not found type screen (depends on browser of course) - same as you would get if the site was accidentally down.

Speaking as a retired computer professional, that's a piss poor thing for them to do. Any of the prior suggestions would be an improvement over that.

 

[ManlyBanisters]

Speaking as a retired computer professional, that's a piss poor thing for them to do. Any of the prior suggestions would be an improvement over that.

Well in fairness Rob is aware it is broken and is working on sorting it out. It's not intentionally that way.

 

[swordfishME]

Originally Posted by Northland

Which is why, this site, as is the case on some other sites, would benefit greatly from a cloaking device. The moderators would exist, and could be contacted; however, nobody would know who they were. There would be no list of moderators by name, and no special marker beneath their name to indicate a status. If one needed a moderator, they would press a 'notify moderator' button-much akin to the report bad post (the ! symbol over to the left in the gold color). In this manner, moderators could do their jobs without the random attacks on them and they would still be able to interact with all the members of the board; never needing to wonder if their stating a belief or opinion, would raise the ire of hundreds and generate dozens of pages of attacks.


Now there is a suggestion that should be definately considered

 

[SteveHd]

MB, I knew that Rob was working on the e-mail (non)notification. I guess the login redirect is part of that.

--------

About cloaking moderators:

I can see possible benefits in that but I also like knowing who they are.