Are people really banned just for irritating other members?
I thought bans were a result of breaking specific forum rules?
What is allowed in a forum is a reflection of the site, therefore allowing anything
at all in a forum is probably not a good idea.
However, if people really are banned just for irritating other members (and not
breaking actual forum rules), I would vote Yes.
but I am not sure that is the case.
In Suggestions, NEW_WAREHOUSE writes:
Hi all.
This is probably going to draw some heat for me, but here it is.
I think the forum ban is wrong.
If a person has an issue with another person or persons I do believe it should
be within the power of the MODs to FORCE IGNORE another user.
After that, then ban away!
Just my thought.
I hate to see someone else go through what our founder went through.
It cost him sales. Made me a ton of money, but cost him sales.
Or talking about breaking a rule while thinking of breaking yet another rule
while writing down a rule that does not exist while talking on the phone about
yet another rule.
And so on.
In Suggestions, eileenkeeney writes:
Are people really banned just for irritating other members?
I thought bans were a result of breaking specific forum rules?
What is allowed in a forum is a reflection of the site, therefore allowing anything
at all in a forum is probably not a good idea.
However, if people really are banned just for irritating other members (and not
breaking actual forum rules), I would vote Yes.
but I am not sure that is the case.
In Suggestions, NEW_WAREHOUSE writes:
Hi all.
This is probably going to draw some heat for me, but here it is.
I think the forum ban is wrong.
If a person has an issue with another person or persons I do believe it should
be within the power of the MODs to FORCE IGNORE another user.
After that, then ban away!
Just my thought.
I hate to see someone else go through what our founder went through.
It cost him sales. Made me a ton of money, but cost him sales.
Or talking about breaking a rule while thinking of breaking yet another rule
while writing down a rule that does not exist while talking on the phone about
yet another rule.
And so on.
In Suggestions, eileenkeeney writes:
Are people really banned just for irritating other members?
I thought bans were a result of breaking specific forum rules?
What is allowed in a forum is a reflection of the site, therefore allowing anything
at all in a forum is probably not a good idea.
However, if people really are banned just for irritating other members (and not
breaking actual forum rules), I would vote Yes.
but I am not sure that is the case.
In Suggestions, NEW_WAREHOUSE writes:
Hi all.
This is probably going to draw some heat for me, but here it is.
I think the forum ban is wrong.
If a person has an issue with another person or persons I do believe it should
be within the power of the MODs to FORCE IGNORE another user.
After that, then ban away!
Just my thought.
I hate to see someone else go through what our founder went through.
It cost him sales. Made me a ton of money, but cost him sales.
Or talking about breaking a rule while thinking of breaking yet another rule
while writing down a rule that does not exist while talking on the phone about
yet another rule.
Isn't this covered already in "Thinking about breaking a rule".
That is like saying
if A then set X = True
if A and B and C and D then set X = True
The 2nd clause is moot, as X has either already been set to True, or will not
be set to True by the 2nd statement.
And so on.
In Suggestions, eileenkeeney writes:
Are people really banned just for irritating other members?
I thought bans were a result of breaking specific forum rules?
What is allowed in a forum is a reflection of the site, therefore allowing anything
at all in a forum is probably not a good idea.
However, if people really are banned just for irritating other members (and not
breaking actual forum rules), I would vote Yes.
but I am not sure that is the case.
In Suggestions, NEW_WAREHOUSE writes:
Hi all.
This is probably going to draw some heat for me, but here it is.
I think the forum ban is wrong.
If a person has an issue with another person or persons I do believe it should
be within the power of the MODs to FORCE IGNORE another user.
After that, then ban away!
Just my thought.
I hate to see someone else go through what our founder went through.
It cost him sales. Made me a ton of money, but cost him sales.
Are people really banned just for irritating other members?
I thought bans were a result of breaking specific forum rules?
What is allowed in a forum is a reflection of the site, therefore allowing anything
at all in a forum is probably not a good idea.
However, if people really are banned just for irritating other members (and not
breaking actual forum rules), I would vote Yes.
but I am not sure that is the case.
In Suggestions, NEW_WAREHOUSE writes:
Hi all.
This is probably going to draw some heat for me, but here it is.
I think the forum ban is wrong.
If a person has an issue with another person or persons I do believe it should
be within the power of the MODs to FORCE IGNORE another user.
After that, then ban away!
Just my thought.
I hate to see someone else go through what our founder went through.
It cost him sales. Made me a ton of money, but cost him sales.
I am now keeping my boxes (the few I have gotten recently, since the types of
sets I do buy tend to come in tubs).
So you have had some influence on me.
Some of the boxes are good for storage (but not with the same pieces that came
in them).
I might paint some of these boxes a solid color, the color of the pieces which
are in them. Or I might just slap on a sticker, with a picture of the piece
stored in the box.
If I ever sell my extra parts (those I bought to use, and then did not get used
because I did re-design), some of these boxes will be used to ship stuff.
But if I again start getting way too many boxes, I might be throwing them out
again.
But first I might offer them to whomever is willing to come and pick them up,
and 2nd to whomever is willing to pay shipping.
Are people really banned just for irritating other members?
Yes
I thought bans were a result of breaking specific forum rules?
There is a catch all in the rules, one can be banned on a whim
What is allowed in a forum is a reflection of the site, therefore allowing anything
at all in a forum is probably not a good idea.
It is a good place to ask opinions and how to solve problems and announcing sales
or outing bad buyers and sellers. As long as content of posts are not something
that a child should read most things should be allowed. A thread lock works
just as well without penalizing a member that they are doing something that violates
the rules or catch alls.
However, if people really are banned just for irritating other members (and not
breaking actual forum rules), I would vote Yes.
but I am not sure that is the case.
Yes. There is no anti-snide rule, but I was banned for being snide. After I came
back with my snide sale, I received a dozen or so emails asking why. One man's
snide is another's humor. I do not believe that sellers should have the power
as a moderator to ban other sellers. In law, a judge will recuse themselves
if there is any hint of conflict of interest.
In Suggestions, NEW_WAREHOUSE writes:
Hi all.
This is probably going to draw some heat for me, but here it is.
I think the forum ban is wrong.
It is wrong as it is a form of censorship not really a ban. Let's call it what
it really is. Having said that, the site is privatively owned and anything can
be done that the owner wishes. We agree to follow the TOC, the mods do not have
to follow that given the fact it is owned by a person or a family.
If a person has an issue with another person or persons I do believe it should
be within the power of the MODs to FORCE IGNORE another user.
After that, then ban away!
Just my thought.
I hate to see someone else go through what our founder went through.
It cost him sales. Made me a ton of money, but cost him sales.
I do not see that any behavior on the forum would cost the site money. But a
ban can. A sale cannot be announced, problems with buyers and sellers cannot
be posted so a ban can cause more monetary harm than any post on the forum.
John P
Are people really banned just for irritating other members?
Yes
I thought bans were a result of breaking specific forum rules?
There is a catch all in the rules, one can be banned on a whim
What is allowed in a forum is a reflection of the site, therefore allowing anything
at all in a forum is probably not a good idea.
It is a good place to ask opinions and how to solve problems and announcing sales
or outing bad buyers and sellers. As long as content of posts are not something
that a child should read most things should be allowed. A thread lock works
just as well without penalizing a member that they are doing something that violates
the rules or catch alls.
However, if people really are banned just for irritating other members (and not
breaking actual forum rules), I would vote Yes.
but I am not sure that is the case.
Yes. There is no anti-snide rule, but I was banned for being snide. After I came
back with my snide sale, I received a dozen or so emails asking why. One man's
snide is another's humor. I do not believe that sellers should have the power
as a moderator to ban other sellers. In law, a judge will recuse themselves
if there is any hint of conflict of interest.
In Suggestions, NEW_WAREHOUSE writes:
Hi all.
This is probably going to draw some heat for me, but here it is.
I think the forum ban is wrong.
It is wrong as it is a form of censorship not really a ban. Let's call it what
it really is. Having said that, the site is privatively owned and anything can
be done that the owner wishes. We agree to follow the TOC, the mods do not have
to follow that given the fact it is owned by a person or a family.
If a person has an issue with another person or persons I do believe it should
be within the power of the MODs to FORCE IGNORE another user.
After that, then ban away!
Just my thought.
I hate to see someone else go through what our founder went through.
It cost him sales. Made me a ton of money, but cost him sales.
I do not see that any behavior on the forum would cost the site money. But a
ban can. A sale cannot be announced, problems with buyers and sellers cannot
be posted so a ban can cause more monetary harm than any post on the forum.
John P
Wonder if banned, one can still do inventory change requests?
The requests are submitted and automaticly posted on the forum...
But if requests can be made and the person is banned, what will happen to the
request
I would be in favor of a mod only being allowed to do a temporary ban, and then
have the case reviewed by a committee (of multiple members).
I have often thought some sort of committee, would make sense for making decisions
related to banning, removal of NSS, feedback, NBP stuff; as opposed to the ultimate
power (and responsibility) lying with one person.
So I would recommend changing the suggestion, from forcing an "ignore" to changing
the nature of how a ban decision is made.
Then I might give it a "yes" vote.
I do not know the actual circumstances of any of the ban actions.
In Suggestions, legoman77 writes:
In Suggestions, eileenkeeney writes:
Are people really banned just for irritating other members?
Yes
I thought bans were a result of breaking specific forum rules?
There is a catch all in the rules, one can be banned on a whim
What is allowed in a forum is a reflection of the site, therefore allowing anything
at all in a forum is probably not a good idea.
It is a good place to ask opinions and how to solve problems and announcing sales
or outing bad buyers and sellers. As long as content of posts are not something
that a child should read most things should be allowed. A thread lock works
just as well without penalizing a member that they are doing something that violates
the rules or catch alls.
However, if people really are banned just for irritating other members (and not
breaking actual forum rules), I would vote Yes.
but I am not sure that is the case.
Yes. There is no anti-snide rule, but I was banned for being snide. After I came
back with my snide sale, I received a dozen or so emails asking why. One man's
snide is another's humor. I do not believe that sellers should have the power
as a moderator to ban other sellers. In law, a judge will recuse themselves
if there is any hint of conflict of interest.
In Suggestions, NEW_WAREHOUSE writes:
Hi all.
This is probably going to draw some heat for me, but here it is.
I think the forum ban is wrong.
It is wrong as it is a form of censorship not really a ban. Let's call it what
it really is. Having said that, the site is privatively owned and anything can
be done that the owner wishes. We agree to follow the TOC, the mods do not have
to follow that given the fact it is owned by a person or a family.
If a person has an issue with another person or persons I do believe it should
be within the power of the MODs to FORCE IGNORE another user.
After that, then ban away!
Just my thought.
I hate to see someone else go through what our founder went through.
It cost him sales. Made me a ton of money, but cost him sales.
I do not see that any behavior on the forum would cost the site money. But a
ban can. A sale cannot be announced, problems with buyers and sellers cannot
be posted so a ban can cause more monetary harm than any post on the forum.
John P
I do not see that any behavior on the forum would cost the site money. But a
ban can. A sale cannot be announced, problems with buyers and sellers cannot
be posted so a ban can cause more monetary harm than any post on the forum.
Regarding content in the forums costing the site money...
There are two sides to this and what you mention regarding a banned seller being
unable to make announcements may indeed have adverse financial consequences for
the seller and the site. The other aspects though, is buyer perception. The
rancor and petty disputes that have been cropping up almost daily in my opinion
tarnish the reputation of sellers and the site in the eyes of buyers. How many
people engaged in these prolonged spats think about how newcomers to the site
view these interactions? In the best case, it makes the participants look childish
and in the worst case makes the site seem hostile and unwelcoming.
The site has a private message function and if it was used to discuss personal
disputes, banning would not be an issue.
I do not see that any behavior on the forum would cost the site money. But a
ban can. A sale cannot be announced, problems with buyers and sellers cannot
be posted so a ban can cause more monetary harm than any post on the forum.
Regarding content in the forums costing the site money...
There are two sides to this and what you mention regarding a banned seller being
unable to make announcements may indeed have adverse financial consequences for
the seller and the site. The other aspects though, is buyer perception. The
rancor and petty disputes that have been cropping up almost daily in my opinion
tarnish the reputation of sellers and the site in the eyes of buyers.
Although I have a few sets (currently) for sale I guess I am technically a seller.
But all my feedback has been as a BUYER first. I am not at all concerned about
any of that...could care less. It is, in fact, informational...shows a lot about
a seller and NOT all is negative...
I think if someone is turned off, as a buyer, from just reading the forum????
Then that person needs thicker skin....
SEPERATE PERSONAL from BUSINESS.... I might totally be against a seller's beliefs
on an issue...but that won't stop me from buying from him/her if he/she is a
fantastic seller!!!
Don't see how the forum can be a downer....just don't see it
How many
people engaged in these prolonged spats think about how newcomers to the site
view these interactions?
Again, as a buyer....it was these types of 'heated' conversations that made me
want to get involved in the forum in the first place...after all those years
just READING, I now wanted to post MY opinions as well...
In the best case, it makes the participants look childish
...yeah, and children and LEGO toys don't go together... (I'm being sarcastic
before anyone jumps down my throat!
and in the worst case makes the site seem hostile and unwelcoming.
Again, thicker skin....can't please ALL the people ALL the time...
The site has a private message function and if it was used to discuss personal
disputes, banning would not be an issue.
People have been temporarily banned for being 'snide'.... so where is the personal
dispute in being 'snide'???
I think if someone is turned off, as a buyer, from just reading the forum????
Then that person needs thicker skin....
If a site has sloppy discussion boards, it makes the site look less professional.
I often think that if people are offended by something, that does not have any
impact on them (meaning it is just as easy to ignore the thing as to complain
about it); that the person needs thicker skin.
But looking professional matters, when doing business.
SEPERATE PERSONAL from BUSINESS.... I might totally be against a seller's beliefs
on an issue...but that won't stop me from buying from him/her if he/she is a
fantastic seller!!!
I feel the same way, when it comes to buying.
(Unless they hurt my feelings, then emotion may inhibit logic).
However, in terms of Business, bricklink is a business.
So perception counts.
My first experience with this forum was rather negative, I came here to ask a
question and the initial responses were less than friendly.
I did almost just leave instead of even poking around to see what the site had
to offer.
Don't see how the forum can be a downer....just don't see it
Perception of how professional the site is operated.
The site benefits from getting business from both thick skinned people and less
thick skinned people.
So even if a behavior is illogical and/or less than mature (such as deciding
not to buy here due to some perception based on reading forum discussions), the
behavior can result in a loss of business.
If I ever get banned from the forum, I will probably quit buying here.
I might not be able to separate emotion from logic, at least not short term.
You SHOULD be able to seperate emotion from logic....in most instances I bet
you have...because you would have never made it this far in life if you had not...
I understand that BL is a business but the FORUM is the part where discussions,
of almost ANY kind should be tolerated.
To say that the forum may tarnish the business? I disagree....if your emotions
continue to run your logic then at the bare minimum just don't buy from the sellers
who gave you 'less than friendly responses' or those sellers that don't mimic
your views...
But to say that BL as a whole has to cater perfectly to everyone is being intellectually
dishonest...the statement, in theory, contradicts itself...
Again, you can't please ALL the people ALL the time....period.
LM
In Suggestions, eileenkeeney writes:
In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
I think if someone is turned off, as a buyer, from just reading the forum????
Then that person needs thicker skin....
If a site has sloppy discussion boards, it makes the site look less professional.
I often think that if people are offended by something, that does not have any
impact on them (meaning it is just as easy to ignore the thing as to complain
about it); that the person needs thicker skin.
But looking professional matters, when doing business.
SEPERATE PERSONAL from BUSINESS.... I might totally be against a seller's beliefs
on an issue...but that won't stop me from buying from him/her if he/she is a
fantastic seller!!!
I feel the same way, when it comes to buying.
(Unless they hurt my feelings, then emotion may inhibit logic).
However, in terms of Business, bricklink is a business.
So perception counts.
My first experience with this forum was rather negative, I came here to ask a
question and the initial responses were less than friendly.
I did almost just leave instead of even poking around to see what the site had
to offer.
Don't see how the forum can be a downer....just don't see it
Perception of how professional the site is operated.
The site benefits from getting business from both thick skinned people and less
thick skinned people.
So even if a behavior is illogical and/or less than mature (such as deciding
not to buy here due to some perception based on reading forum discussions), the
behavior can result in a loss of business.
If I ever get banned from the forum, I will probably quit buying here.
I might not be able to separate emotion from logic, at least not short term.
You SHOULD be able to seperate emotion from logic....in most instances I bet
you have...because you would have never made it this far in life if you had not...
I understand that BL is a business but the FORUM is the part where discussions,
of almost ANY kind should be tolerated.
To say that the forum may tarnish the business? I disagree....if your emotions
continue to run your logic then at the bare minimum just don't buy from the sellers
who gave you 'less than friendly responses' or those sellers that don't mimic
your views...
But to say that BL as a whole has to cater perfectly to everyone is being intellectually
dishonest...the statement, in theory, contradicts itself...
Again, you can't please ALL the people ALL the time....period.
LM
To say we are adults, means that we know how to behave as adults. I don't know
that we should have to conform to the highest common denominator, but we shouldn't
have to stoop to the lowest common denominator, either.
But then said another way, "BL should not then have to cater to just the highest
common denominator"...
If we want to appeal to the MOST buyers, then the bell-curve middle is the answer.
Semantics....
LM
In Suggestions, aftepes writes:
In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
You (as all BL'ers) are an adult....
You SHOULD be able to seperate emotion from logic....in most instances I bet
you have...because you would have never made it this far in life if you had not...
I understand that BL is a business but the FORUM is the part where discussions,
of almost ANY kind should be tolerated.
To say that the forum may tarnish the business? I disagree....if your emotions
continue to run your logic then at the bare minimum just don't buy from the sellers
who gave you 'less than friendly responses' or those sellers that don't mimic
your views...
But to say that BL as a whole has to cater perfectly to everyone is being intellectually
dishonest...the statement, in theory, contradicts itself...
Again, you can't please ALL the people ALL the time....period.
LM
To say we are adults, means that we know how to behave as adults. I don't know
that we should have to conform to the highest common denominator, but we shouldn't
have to stoop to the lowest common denominator, either.
But then said another way, "BL should not then have to cater to just the highest
common denominator"...
If we want to appeal to the MOST buyers, then the bell-curve middle is the answer.
Semantics....
LM
But BL isn't a democracy, it's a decision for the Admin which he gives authority
to the Mods and community overseer for acting on those decisions. The rules have
been set and that's it.
But then said another way, "BL should not then have to cater to just the highest
common denominator"...
If we want to appeal to the MOST buyers, then the bell-curve middle is the answer.
Semantics....
LM
But BL isn't a democracy, it's a decision for the Admin which he gives authority
to the Mods and community overseer for acting on those decisions. The rules have
been set and that's it.
And that is why the Topic Description reads "Suggestions".
You SHOULD be able to seperate emotion from logic....in most instances I bet
you have...because you would have never made it this far in life if you had not...
This is the internet. Rules and logic of the real world do not apply here
-Ash
You SHOULD be able to seperate emotion from logic....in most instances I bet
you have...because you would have never made it this far in life if you had not...
This is the internet. Rules and logic of the real world do not apply here
-Ash
I guess, I have to remind that phrase for handling catalog requests...
I do not see that any behavior on the forum would cost the site money. But a
ban can. A sale cannot be announced, problems with buyers and sellers cannot
be posted so a ban can cause more monetary harm than any post on the forum.
Regarding content in the forums costing the site money...
There are two sides to this and what you mention regarding a banned seller being
unable to make announcements may indeed have adverse financial consequences for
the seller and the site. The other aspects though, is buyer perception. The
rancor and petty disputes that have been cropping up almost daily in my opinion
tarnish the reputation of sellers and the site in the eyes of buyers. How many
people engaged in these prolonged spats think about how newcomers to the site
view these interactions? In the best case, it makes the participants look childish
and in the worst case makes the site seem hostile and unwelcoming.
The site has a private message function and if it was used to discuss personal
disputes, banning would not be an issue.
I do not disagree with what you are saying. But only a very small percentage
of buyers ever come to the forum. Most forums I have seen are very lively.
My daughter, god bless her soul, is involved with mafia wars (some sort of on
line thing that is very popular.) She has been offered a position as a moderator
on this or some other game. There are also fights there too. The naked Barbie
forum gets very heated sometimes.
Discussing and arguing in not necessarily childish. The problem stems from members
thinking whatever they say is correct.
I guess one guy on here is banned, only a guess. I do not agree with that either.
He has helped many many people with well thought out replies to problems or
perceived problems. Has he caused rancor - yes, be he has also helped. His explanations
can be extremely insightful and if he is not here, he will be missed and it is
a loss to this site. He was or is an asset to BrickLink.
I have sold tons to new buyers. Going over the last six months of my orders
I have 70 buyers who have not left feedback and they have from 0 to 2 feedbacks
and one of the two's are mine. I am quite sure, and this is an opinion, that
these people neither read the forum nor care about it, they are here to buy.
Very few people post here with little or no feedback. New buyers don't really
care about the forum. The ones that care are the ones like me, who just get
mouthy and use the forum as a form of entertainment or information. Anyone who
comes to the forum probably knows how forums work and that there are spats often.
Just an opinion again.
Like one person posted, perhaps a single person should not have all the power
to decide what is right or wrong, especially if that person is a major seller
here and the concept of conflict of interest may play a part either actual or
preceived.
John P
I do not see that any behavior on the forum would cost the site money. But a
ban can. A sale cannot be announced, problems with buyers and sellers cannot
be posted so a ban can cause more monetary harm than any post on the forum.
Regarding content in the forums costing the site money...
There are two sides to this and what you mention regarding a banned seller being
unable to make announcements may indeed have adverse financial consequences for
the seller and the site. The other aspects though, is buyer perception. The
rancor and petty disputes that have been cropping up almost daily in my opinion
tarnish the reputation of sellers and the site in the eyes of buyers. How many
people engaged in these prolonged spats think about how newcomers to the site
view these interactions? In the best case, it makes the participants look childish
and in the worst case makes the site seem hostile and unwelcoming.
The site has a private message function and if it was used to discuss personal
disputes, banning would not be an issue.
I do not disagree with what you are saying. But only a very small percentage
of buyers ever come to the forum. Most forums I have seen are very lively.
My daughter, god bless her soul, is involved with mafia wars (some sort of on
line thing that is very popular.) She has been offered a position as a moderator
on this or some other game. There are also fights there too. The naked Barbie
forum gets very heated sometimes.
Discussing and arguing in not necessarily childish. The problem stems from members
thinking whatever they say is correct.
I guess one guy on here is banned, only a guess. I do not agree with that either.
He has helped many many people with well thought out replies to problems or
perceived problems. Has he caused rancor - yes, be he has also helped. His explanations
can be extremely insightful and if he is not here, he will be missed and it is
a loss to this site. He was or is an asset to BrickLink.
I have sold tons to new buyers. Going over the last six months of my orders
I have 70 buyers who have not left feedback and they have from 0 to 2 feedbacks
and one of the two's are mine. I am quite sure, and this is an opinion, that
these people neither read the forum nor care about it, they are here to buy.
Very few people post here with little or no feedback. New buyers don't really
care about the forum. The ones that care are the ones like me, who just get
mouthy and use the forum as a form of entertainment or information. Anyone who
comes to the forum probably knows how forums work and that there are spats often.
Just an opinion again.
Like one person posted, perhaps a single person should not have all the power
to decide what is right or wrong, especially if that person is a major seller
here and the concept of conflict of interest may play a part either actual or
preceived.
John P
But only a very small percentage of buyers ever come to the forum.
In all likelihood you're right, but you can't base the number of visitors to
the forums by looking at how many post. In my experience, there are far more
lurkers than posters in online forums. Anyway, I'll consider that point rebutted.
In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
Again, thicker skin....can't please ALL the people ALL the time...
I'll agree that it would be great if everyone had a thicker skin. I don't think
most people have a very thick skin. At least in my offline relationships, whether
friends, coworkers, or family, almost everyone is easily offended. I can count
the thick skinned people on one hand. People should be thick skinned because
words are just words, but what should be isn't. Consistent objectivity isn't
a trait most people have.
So we have to be realistic and acknowledge that people do have buttons and will
push each others' buttons (especially in an online forum), and we have to decide
what to do about it. Most forums of any significant size end up adopting a moderation
system because the people who run the forums get to experience Lord of the Flies
situations early on and don't like it.
As for being snide, I haven't been around long enough to have an opinion, except
to wonder why it is brought up as often as it is.
But only a very small percentage of buyers ever come to the forum.
In all likelihood you're right, but you can't base the number of visitors to
the forums by looking at how many post. In my experience, there are far more
lurkers than posters in online forums. Anyway, I'll consider that point rebutted.
In Suggestions, rikitikitaviguy writes:
Again, thicker skin....can't please ALL the people ALL the time...
I'll agree that it would be great if everyone had a thicker skin. I don't think
most people have a very thick skin. At least in my offline relationships, whether
friends, coworkers, or family, almost everyone is easily offended. I can count
the thick skinned people on one hand. People should be thick skinned because
words are just words, but what should be isn't. Consistent objectivity isn't
a trait most people have.
So we have to be realistic and acknowledge that people do have buttons and will
push each others' buttons (especially in an online forum), and we have to decide
what to do about it. Most forums of any significant size end up adopting a moderation
system because the people who run the forums get to experience Lord of the Flies
situations early on and don't like it.
As for being snide, I haven't been around long enough to have an opinion, except
to wonder why it is brought up as often as it is.
...because members of the forum have been banned and upon asking a reason he/she/they
were told they were banned "for being snide"...
This is probably going to draw some heat for me, but here it is.
I think the forum ban is wrong.
If a person has an issue with another person or persons I do believe it should
be within the power of the MODs to FORCE IGNORE another user.
After that, then ban away!
Just my thought.
I hate to see someone else go through what our founder went through.
It cost him sales. Made me a ton of money, but cost him sales.
A force ignore would have worked just as well.
Thank you for thinking about it.
Have a great day!
How about if someone can't behave and be at least civil, admins/mods determine
that they therefore must not be an adult and ban from the site for being underage.
This is probably going to draw some heat for me, but here it is.
I think the forum ban is wrong.
If a person has an issue with another person or persons I do believe it should
be within the power of the MODs to FORCE IGNORE another user.
After that, then ban away!
Just my thought.
I hate to see someone else go through what our founder went through.
It cost him sales. Made me a ton of money, but cost him sales.
A force ignore would have worked just as well.
Thank you for thinking about it.
Have a great day!
How about if someone can't behave and be at least civil, admins/mods determine
that they therefore must not be an adult and ban from the site for being underage.
Assuming under age due to behavior?
Interesting idea.
This is probably going to draw some heat for me, but here it is.
I think the forum ban is wrong.
If a person has an issue with another person or persons I do believe it should
be within the power of the MODs to FORCE IGNORE another user.
After that, then ban away!
Just my thought.
I hate to see someone else go through what our founder went through.
It cost him sales. Made me a ton of money, but cost him sales.
A force ignore would have worked just as well.
Thank you for thinking about it.
Have a great day!
How about if someone can't behave and be at least civil, admins/mods determine
that they therefore must not be an adult and ban from the site for being underage.
Assuming under age due to behavior?
Interesting idea.
This is probably going to draw some heat for me, but here it is.
I think the forum ban is wrong.
If a person has an issue with another person or persons I do believe it should
be within the power of the MODs to FORCE IGNORE another user.
After that, then ban away!
Just my thought.
I hate to see someone else go through what our founder went through.
It cost him sales. Made me a ton of money, but cost him sales.
A force ignore would have worked just as well.
Thank you for thinking about it.
Have a great day!
This is an adult site. If you can't post something without feeling 100% sure
of what you are going to post, then the post shouldn't be made. As adults we
have at least 18 years of life experience under our belts telling us how to behave.
If you can't do that, then you lose your forum privileges. I doubt that the people
complaining about this, past and present, were ever banned without just provocation
or without an alert to change their behavior.
I know that I've never been banned, nor taken aside to discuss my behavior, so
I would have to say that members are given a pretty wide berth on what they can
and cannot do.
Also, we fail to recognize that the forum and chat are not necessary to your
involvement selling or buying at this site. While they are nice features, if
you abuse them or the rules surrounding them, then you have to deal with the
consequences.
Making convoluted processes and rules further governing the forum are not necessary.
This is probably going to draw some heat for me, but here it is.
I think the forum ban is wrong.
If a person has an issue with another person or persons I do believe it should
be within the power of the MODs to FORCE IGNORE another user.
My opinion falls pretty far to one extreme when it comes to moderation. No only
do I think that banning (permanent or temporary) is usually a bad idea, I'm also
against most other forms of moderation most of the time. Deleting posts? Silly.
Locking threads? Silly. Having a rule against bad language? Silly. Having a rule
that the forum atmosphere has to be "positive" and "family friendly" ... super-duper
silly.
Most bannings, as far as I have noticed (they don't get publicized much) have
stemmed from flame wars where users have attacked one another personally. Are
people really that shallow and sensitive that they can't accept being called
names? Do we really need an authority figure to step in and to stop the appearance
of rude words? The entire idea just seems incredibly childish to me. Forum moderation
is useful when the participants are nine years old. It's just obnoxious when
it's meant to control the behaviour of adults.
People have been threatened with being banned for calling the moderators' motives
into question. Utterly, absolutely, thoroughly ... silly.
Of course, it's not my house, so I don't make the rules.
(And, in case anyone is wondering, no, I have never been banned from the Forum.
Though, it wouldn't surprise me if it happened eventually, because I know that
I have posted some snide remarks, just like John has. If you don't see me post
at all for a whole week ... yeah.)
This is probably going to draw some heat for me, but here it is.
I think the forum ban is wrong.
If a person has an issue with another person or persons I do believe it should
be within the power of the MODs to FORCE IGNORE another user.
My opinion falls pretty far to one extreme when it comes to moderation. No only
do I think that banning (permanent or temporary) is usually a bad idea, I'm also
against most other forms of moderation most of the time. Deleting posts? Silly.
Locking threads? Silly. Having a rule against bad language? Silly. Having a rule
that the forum atmosphere has to be "positive" and "family friendly" ... super-duper
silly.
A-Freakin Correct!!! (see my last post)
Most bannings, as far as I have noticed (they don't get publicized much) have
stemmed from flame wars where users have attacked one another personally. Are
people really that shallow and sensitive that they can't accept being called
names? Do we really need an authority figure to step in and to stop the appearance
of rude words?
Exactly!!! Thicker skin people!!!!
The entire idea just seems incredibly childish to me. Forum moderation
is useful when the participants are nine years old. It's just obnoxious when
it's meant to control the behaviour of adults.
Are you over 18? Legoboy was not and people made 'fun' of me and 'hurt my
feelings' when I questioned him (going to cry now as I have thin skin)
But I was right to question people!!!
People have been threatened with being banned for calling the moderators' motives
into question. Utterly, absolutely, thoroughly ... silly.
Of course, it's not my house, so I don't make the rules.
(And, in case anyone is wondering, no, I have never been banned from the Forum.
Though, it wouldn't surprise me if it happened eventually, because I know that
I have posted some snide remarks, just like John has. If you don't see me post
at all for a whole week ... yeah.)
(And, in case anyone is wondering, no, I have never been banned from the Forum.
Though, it wouldn't surprise me if it happened eventually, because I know that
I have posted some snide remarks, just like John has. If you don't see me post
at all for a whole week ... yeah.)
--
Marc.
That is the problem, some people are allowed to be snide and others are not.
So it comes down to a personal decision for the moderator. "I don't like what
was said so I will ban someone." Very poor in my opinion. What is even worse,
no one knows what is not allowed as there is not discussion about the nebulous
rules. As one mod said "I have told you before not to mention so and so's name.
He is totally wrong, that was not said, so decisions can be made with a faulty
memory also. If one is going to lead they should at least get their facts straight
first.
John P
(And, in case anyone is wondering, no, I have never been banned from the Forum.
Though, it wouldn't surprise me if it happened eventually, because I know that
I have posted some snide remarks, just like John has. If you don't see me post
at all for a whole week ... yeah.)
--
Marc.
That is the problem, some people are allowed to be snide and others are not.
So it comes down to a personal decision for the moderator. "I don't like what
was said so I will ban someone." Very poor in my opinion. What is even worse,
no one knows what is not allowed as there is not discussion about the nebulous
rules. As one mod said "I have told you before not to mention so and so's name.
He is totally wrong, that was not said, so decisions can be made with a faulty
memory also. If one is going to lead they should at least get their facts straight
first.
If you are going to quote me while whining, please do so accurately. The post
in reference does start out with "I may be mistaken". Also, the post was canceled
based on its content, not on my memory.
Also, your continued harping about being banned for your snide remarks is getting
tiresome. Every other post does not need to bring it back up. You said something
you shouldn't have, learn from it and move on.
As for others "getting away with things", I have said many times that we do not
catch everything. And if we did, then you'd all be whining that we are too heavy
handed.
The "rules" are really quite simple. Keep it civil and you shouldn't have any
trouble. Avoid making "jokes" at the expense of others, especially others that
you have a contentious history with.
(And, in case anyone is wondering, no, I have never been banned from the Forum.
Though, it wouldn't surprise me if it happened eventually, because I know that
I have posted some snide remarks, just like John has. If you don't see me post
at all for a whole week ... yeah.)
--
Marc.
That is the problem, some people are allowed to be snide and others are not.
So it comes down to a personal decision for the moderator. "I don't like what
was said so I will ban someone." Very poor in my opinion. What is even worse,
no one knows what is not allowed as there is not discussion about the nebulous
rules. As one mod said "I have told you before not to mention so and so's name.
He is totally wrong, that was not said, so decisions can be made with a faulty
memory also. If one is going to lead they should at least get their facts straight
first.
If you are going to quote me while whining, please do so accurately. The post
in reference does start out with "I may be mistaken". Also, the post was canceled
based on its content, not on my memory.
Also, your continued harping about being banned for your snide remarks is getting
tiresome. Every other post does not need to bring it back up. You said something
you shouldn't have, learn from it and move on.
As for others "getting away with things", I have said many times that we do not
catch everything. And if we did, then you'd all be whining that we are too heavy
handed.
The "rules" are really quite simple. Keep it civil and you shouldn't have any
trouble. Avoid making "jokes" at the expense of others, especially others that
you have a contentious history with.
Troy
For some reason I keep thinking of this scene:
WOMAN: King of the who?
ARTHUR: The Britons.
WOMAN: Who are the Britons?
ARTHUR: Well, we all are. We are all Britons, and I am your king.
WOMAN: I didn't know we had a king. I thought we were an autonomous
collective.
DENNIS: You're fooling yourself. We're living in a dictatorship. A self-
perpetuating autocracy in which the working classes--
WOMAN: Oh, there you go, bringing class into it again.
DENNIS: That's what it's all about. If only people would hear of--
ARTHUR: Please, please good people. I am in haste. Who lives in that castle?
WOMAN: No one live there.
ARTHUR: Then who is your lord?
WOMAN: We don't have a lord.
ARTHUR: What?
DENNIS: I told you. We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take it in
turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week.
ARTHUR: Yes.
DENNIS: But all the decision of that officer have to be ratified at a special
bi-weekly meeting--
ARTHUR: Yes, I see.
DENNIS: By a simple majority in the case of purely internal affairs,--
ARTHUR: Be quiet!
DENNIS: But by a two-thirds majority in the case of more major--
ARTHUR: Be quiet! I order you to be quiet!
WOMAN: Order, eh? Who does he think he is? Heh.
ARTHUR: I am your king!
WOMAN: Well, I didn't vote for you.
ARTHUR: You don't vote for kings.
WOMAN: Well, how did you become king then?
ARTHUR: The Lady of the Lake,...
[angels sing]
...her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from
the bosom of the water signifying by Divine Providence that I, Arthur, was
to carry Excalibur.
[singing stops]
That is why I am your king!
DENNIS: Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis
for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate
from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
ARTHUR: Be quiet!
DENNIS: Well, but you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just
'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!
ARTHUR: Shut up!
DENNIS: I mean, if I went 'round saying I was an emperor just because some
moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away!
ARTHUR: Shut up, will you. Shut up!
DENNIS: Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system.
ARTHUR: Shut up!
DENNIS: Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help, help!
I'm being repressed!
ARTHUR: Bloody peasant!
DENNIS: Oh, what a give-away. Did you hear that? Did you hear that, eh?
That's what I'm on about. Did you see him repressing me? You saw it,
didn't you?
USA, Ohio
United Kingdom, England
Belgium
and it still
Germany, Berlin
Canada, Ontario
Netherlands, Utrecht