Douschebag Hall of Fame

zoogs said:
It can't be too surprising, the amount of "I got ____, so ____ needs to get ______"/"why isn't ______ banned yet" we get.

I guess I should amend that to say if you break rules, you'll get warnings and suspensions as appropriate. I'd like to reserve actual bans for the two categories I mentioned earlier. But once there's been enough warning accumulation and so on, bans tend to get inevitable. :/ I can only argue so much for a member who I don't want to see banned but who has racked up a long list of warnings.

Don't call people names and you should be okay.
default_tongue.png
Click to expand...
Well, in my post I specifically said suspend, not ban.
Also, the number of warnings shouldn't be relevant. Use warnings/year
default_tongue.png


When I was suspended I was told I had a lot of warning points (3 at the time) but that's in 6 years. You aren't living if you don't have at least half a warning point/year, I always say.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
zoogs said:
Really? I remember you having put a few guys on ignore. It's kind of where I got the idea. Perhaps that was after your retirement.

I don't know, maybe it'll be a short-lived experiment. Didn't mean to touch off a whole discussion about it.
Click to expand...
It's a discussion because mods shouldn't have anyone on ignore unless for a very personal reason.

 
Idk, is it really that big of a deal if one mod has one person on ignore? There are other mods after all, and if the post gets reported he can always click to view the post.

 
zoogs said:
Really? I remember you having put a few guys on ignore. It's kind of where I got the idea. Perhaps that was after your retirement.

I don't know, maybe it'll be a short-lived experiment. Didn't mean to touch off a whole discussion about it.
Click to expand...
Turns out you're right and I'm misremembering.

 
1995 Redux said:
Idk, is it really that big of a deal if one mod has one person on ignore? There are other mods after all, and if the post gets reported he can always click to view the post.
Click to expand...
If one does it/thinks it's ok, then they're probably not alone. And if multiple mods have the same person on ignore, maybe they should rethink how they're dealing with that person. If they can't handle reading the person's posts themselves why are they ok with everyone else doing it and moderating the forum themselves by reporting?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Moiraine said:
1995 Redux said:
Idk, is it really that big of a deal if one mod has one person on ignore? There are other mods after all, and if the post gets reported he can always click to view the post.
Click to expand...
If one does it/thinks it's ok, then they're probably not alone. And if multiple mods have the same person on ignore, maybe they should rethink how they're dealing that person. If they can't handle reading the person's posts themselves why are they ok with everyone else doing it and moderating the forum themselves by reporting?
Click to expand...
Because Mods are people too and their personal preference of posters may not be the same as the majority of other posters. For example, Zoogs likes cm husker while roughly 10 million other members have put him on ignore.
 
cm husker said:
To those who are able to understand the English language, it certainly does. Glad you apparently can and are pointing out the sense.
Click to expand...
But, he's "harmless," of course.

zoogs said:
I'd like this to be a self-moderating community where adults don't ask for other adults to be kicked out. I don't think that's a big ask. We should only have to use the mod toolbox for spammers and people who completely lose it.
Click to expand...
With all due respect zoogs, we'd also like our neighborhoods and public places to be self-moderating, but you sometimes still need to call the police.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top