The Fundamental Problem with Permanent Bans

[Kotaro]

That there's not 50 or so more of them for the assholish people that troll and spam these forums.

Says the guy trolling...


ps. thanks for being the first in this thread to use salty language Kotaro. I was worried I'd be the first to use naughty language, but I feel as if a great weight has been lifted from my shoulders.

Congrats, you can misquote people with dumb pictures. I praise you for your great editing peoples posts.

And no, I was not trolling. You gave your opinion on the problem behind permanent bans, and I gave mine. You sit here and shout "they didn't deserve this", but fact is, you have no read every single warning, every single post they've made, and you only have 1 side of the story. In short, you don't know shit, and you bitch. Move on with your life.

[Woodruff]

ive gotten into very heated arguements with many different mods over clan rights actually.. and ive never had a problem with them attempting to exact revenge... or being vindictive....

And so, despite all of the testimony saying that it does go on, since it hasn't happened to you, you completely disallow for the possibility that it does?
Come on...

frankly, if it were up to me, people would get 2 warnings, then banned. i think the mods are often too lenient if anything.
the only people that complain that they are too strict are people that make a habit of breaking the rules..

Two things here. First of all, I do actually agree almost completely with hwhrhett here. I too think the mods are quite lenient. That being said, I do think that DM's offenses in THIS PARTICULAR case weren't really worthy of a perma-ban (though I do think he's had PREVIOUS offenses that were, so...).

I understand that it was a culmination of events that lead to his demise.

True enough, certainly. I guess my thinking in that regard is that if it's a serious offense (not necessarily as serious as the previous offense, but serious nonetheless), then the perma-ban is justified. But DM's statements in the referenced-offenses were...geez, really not very offensive. It just seemed like a really weak justification for a perma-ban, regardless of what he'd done previously (and I am honestly a fan of the perma-ban capability). I guess I just think if they'd have waited a week or two, he'd certainly have provided them with perfectly reasonable ACTUAL justification that would be difficult to argue with...it was his nature, after all.

[pimpdave]

to be filled in

[jiminski]

but that's what i mean mate. The 'demand' that your opinion be respected, just because it is your opinion, kind of undermines the perusers ability to view your answer with an open mind.
you snatched defeat from the jaws of potential victory with your first breath. In my opinion that opening did a disservice to the obvious care you took to address the situation.

I have to disagree. I made the statement with the intent that the care I took in my responses be displayed in the responses made following regarding my comments. I suppose you don't have to respect them if you don't wish, to be honest, I'm rather used to it as even on the few occasions I've made an effort to measure my words carefully they are ignored or ridiculed at best. Keep in mind that while many of you feel disrespected and abused, that perhaps you should give some thought as well to the situations you put the admin and moderator teams in by bashing your heads against everything that we do, positive or otherwise. You wish to be respected, and so do we, however often it is made to seem that the only ones being abused are the members at large, which I personally believe to be false. I don't intend to put myself out there as a martyr as I get paid to make unpopular decisions, and I get paid to take the flack and abuse, but many on TeamCC do not, which presents an interesting situation to say the least.

That's a discussion for another time and place however, take what you will from my comments, they were meant to be an honest and true description of my thoughts in answer to the questions posed. I hold no false hope that they will please many individuals, but thought it might be worthwhile to put them out there so that they could be seen by the many who feel that the admins are ignoring the current situation.

you have to disagree with how your opening appeared to me?
.. anyway, i understand that the beginning of your post comes of frustration but all i am saying is that the very beginning undermines somewhat the body of the text which followed.

I am just explaining to you that it came over, to me at least, in a way which spoiled what followed. That was a shame considering the effort you put into the answer.

Saying this, I do not agree with much of what you actually said but i did actually respect it as your honest and sincere opinion .. But now due to the start; the ultimatum of respect and it being a latent profession of the final word on the matter, i am talking about that instead of the body of the post.

My apologies for inadvertently spoiling the majority of my comments for you, jiminski, that certainly was not my intent, and my choice of words could quite likely have been better, but like I said, I can't please everyone, and if you wish to feel the comments were spoiled, it is entirely your right. To be honest, I didn't think you'd agree with anything I had to say anyways. That's alright though, most won't.

Not all of us can be spectacularly eloquent at all times.

i appreciate that mate, but i am genuinely just trying to say that approach, style and perceived intent count for a lot before we reach content.
you may think i am being pedantic .. i'm not actually. And though i may not agree with you, i hope your having read some of my posts, you realise that i am far from unsympathetic to nor lacking respect for the importance of the mods' role.

I am actually, in all my posts, waxing on the importance of all our roles in the dynamics of this site.

[captain.crazy]

True enough, certainly. I guess my thinking in that regard is that if it's a serious offense (not necessarily as serious as the previous offense, but serious nonetheless), then the perma-ban is justified. But DM's statements in the referenced-offenses were...geez, really not very offensive. It just seemed like a really weak justification for a perma-ban, regardless of what he'd done previously (and I am honestly a fan of the perma-ban capability). I guess I just think if they'd have waited a week or two, he'd certainly have provided them with perfectly reasonable ACTUAL justification that would be difficult to argue with...it was his nature, after all.

Sure, but I actually got a 24 hour ban for a post that I made to you. I don't think that you reported it, but, I took the hit, nonetheless. I absolutely don't think that it was a ban-worthy post. But rules are rules.

[redhawk92]

there is no such thing as ban worthy

mods and admins are inconsistent

[F1fth]

Tell you what, F1fth, I'll answer these questions with my honest answers from the point of view as an admin. However, I want you to respect those answers and understand that the answers are not going to please everyone as well as refrain from dragging things through the mud when I'm finished. Sound like a deal?

-Do you think permabans should only be issued when absolutely necessary?

Yes, I think that permanent forum bans should be used as a final measure to ensure the stability of the community. However, in the effort to ensure that stability, I also believe that if a user has received numerous warnings and punishments that a permanent forum ban can be warranted to prevent problems from arising if the user has demonstrated that they are here in the community to be a general nuisance and very little else, regardless of how popular they may be with some forum regulars.

-Do you think a permaban in the case of DM was absolutely necessary

Anyone can always argue that anything is never absolutely necessary, which I think makes sense to most of us. In the case of Dancing Mustard, yes, I do believe it was time for him to go, and I do support the decision that was made as a collective of four admins over the course of a discussion that had facts and examples brought forward in what I believe to be a fair manner.

-Do you think the community is better (as a whole, not personally) without DM around?

Yes, I do, and please let me explain why. During Dancing Mustard's self-imposed sabbatical from Conquer Club the moderation team and the admins especially enduring a very large drop in complaints about the atmosphere in the forum as a whole. Was Dancing Mustard the only cause for those complaints? No, he was not, they are largely brought about by a chosen few forum regulars (who I shall not name out of respect and a wish to avoid mud-slinging). Upon his return, the number of general complaints about him and others who followed his lead began to rise dramatically, at least in respect to the work that I do personally as an admin, I cannot speak for the other three members of the admin team.

I am entirely willing to admit that over my time here at Conquer Club I have laughed out loud on many occasions due to the wit of Dancing Mustard, and at times I've thought he was dead on with his ideas and thoughts, but that does not change the fact that not everyone saw him as some sort of hero or personality figure in the forum, and as admins it is our jobs to try and make decisions that will benefit the greater number of people. Many here don't believe the decision to ban Dancing Mustard permanently is of benefit, but what everyone also needs to remember is that what you see here in the publicly viewed forums is not the entire story of the impact he had on the community. Think what you will about that, but it is the truth.

-Do you think the community should get any input as to what is best for the community?

I don't think that the community at large should be put in charge of discussing who should and should not be permanently banned, no. I think that will lead to many more problems than it would solve. However, I do think that the community can be allowed to have a voice in deciding certain things that will ultimately provide what is best for the community. Case in point is the not so far in the past situation revolving around bigotry/racism and the policies that should be enforced regarding such things. The community was clamoring for more definitive punishment procedures and out of that came quite a productive discussion about consistency, the difference between major and minor forum infractions, and many other things. As a result of the community input AndyDufresne was able to determine two new ladders for escalating punishments, one for major infractions, and one for minor infractions.

Interestingly enough, the community was quite pleased when Andy made it known that the new ladders were in place and he explained how they would be used, but now that they are being enforced and someone who is "beloved" by the community is the victim all of the sudden these new ladders of punishment are inadequate and absurd. I find it quite interesting to see the same people who praised the new ladders now tearing them down as absurd, but that is simply my personal opinion.

-Finally, do you think shortening the term of DM's ban to a temporary one would cause a problem?

Yes, I do believe that it would. He was punished according to the new punishment system that the community was calling for and he received the proper punishment within that system. To reverse the decision will not only make the system worthless, but it will also require many other bans to be reversed as well, something that is not favorable in the least.

Finally, I've been waiting for sufficient justification for so long that I though it would never come. This is the kind of response we've been wanting.

Though I respect your words and the thought you put into your response, I still disagree with the decision of course and the necessity to ban him, but I realize I really can't do much about it. All I can and will do is keep my avatar black so we do not forget, and strongly urge the administration to keep an open mind about reconsidering, or at the very least at a later date.

Were it I that was perma banned, would there be such protest? Black avatars, indeed. He can still play the games, from what I can tell. That is, after all, what this site is for, no?

Maybe not black avatars, but if you were permanbanned I would certainly not be happy and I'd say so, too. Just because I find you annoying doesn't mean I want to see you permanently removed from this place. Really, the only people I think should be permabanned are cheaters and people posting flagrantly offensive material (racism, porn, etc.).

[captain.crazy]

Were it I that was perma banned, would there be such protest? Black avatars, indeed. He can still play the games, from what I can tell. That is, after all, what this site is for, no?

Maybe not black avatars, but if you were permanbanned I would certainly not be happy and I'd say so, too. Just because I find you annoying doesn't mean I want to see you permanently removed from this place. Really, the only people I think should be permabanned are cheaters and people posting flagrantly offensive material (racism, porn, etc.).

Maybe you, but lets be realistic... there are those that feel it is their place to frame me up as a multi, to get me banned, jsut because of my political views. It's really shallow.

[Woodruff]

True enough, certainly. I guess my thinking in that regard is that if it's a serious offense (not necessarily as serious as the previous offense, but serious nonetheless), then the perma-ban is justified. But DM's statements in the referenced-offenses were...geez, really not very offensive. It just seemed like a really weak justification for a perma-ban, regardless of what he'd done previously (and I am honestly a fan of the perma-ban capability). I guess I just think if they'd have waited a week or two, he'd certainly have provided them with perfectly reasonable ACTUAL justification that would be difficult to argue with...it was his nature, after all.

Sure, but I actually got a 24 hour ban for a post that I made to you. I don't think that you reported it, but, I took the hit, nonetheless. I absolutely don't think that it was a ban-worthy post. But rules are rules.

I actually got a 24-hour ban for a post that I made to you, as well...and probably over the same time-period. And I felt exactly the same about it (as Andy is at this point well aware...). But that doesn't change my point, because a 24-hour ban is a pretty minimal punishment whereas the perma-ban is not. It's easy enough to accept a minimal punishment, but not such a severe one. <chuckle>

Oh, and for what it's worth...as you say, I'm pretty sure it wasn't me that reported you (though that's mostly just because I don't remember any posts of yours that I thought were offensive enough...).

[F1fth]

Were it I that was perma banned, would there be such protest? Black avatars, indeed. He can still play the games, from what I can tell. That is, after all, what this site is for, no?

Maybe not black avatars, but if you were permanbanned I would certainly not be happy and I'd say so, too. Just because I find you annoying doesn't mean I want to see you permanently removed from this place. Really, the only people I think should be permabanned are cheaters and people posting flagrantly offensive material (racism, porn, etc.).

Maybe you, but lets be realistic... there are those that feel it is their place to frame me up as a multi, to get me banned, jsut because of my political views. It's really shallow.

That may be true, but if it makes you feel any better people simply wouldn't give a shit if I were the one banned. If it were you, it would cause some kind of stir, positive and negative I'm sure.

[alex951]

Law, without force, is impotent.
-Pascal

[Woodruff]

Law, without force, is impotent.

So then you side strongly with the moderators on this issue, I take it?

[hwhrhett]

Law, without force, is impotent.
-Pascal

nice quote

[Simon Viavant]

So far nobody has responded yet to my point that the community guidelines say you get banned for being a problem to the COMMUNITY. Anyone care to take a shot at it?

[Woodruff]

Let's say people were complaining about DM. WHat's more important isn't the number of complaints, but the percentage. If 5 people complain about someone who has just joined and few people know the site, it should be taken more seriously than someone who gets 10 complaints but is liked by everyone else.

Or, if they're going to have a complaint button, have a karma button too, where we can click to let people know that we appreciate and value the post, instead of only ever sending negative messages to the mods.

Of course, that's a silly compromise, the truth is, the mods should stop being so retart, and foster community rather than the divisive and toxic atmosphere they've been fostering since Twill was in charge.

Come on Hyasri, prove to us that Twill actually did leave. Prove to us that you really do mean to usher in a new time of "love and peace". Stop with the old paradigm as you claimed you would. I know you can do it. I'm sure you can. Give us a reason to have faith and we will.

Um...Hyasri's been gone for some time now.

It's really sad, but this site could be so much better if half the complaints that result in bans resulted in mods suggesting the crybaby put the person they dislike on ignore.

"Being better for you" does not necessarily equate to being "better".

[Haggis_McMutton]

I actually got a 24-hour ban for a post that I made to you, as well...and probably over the same time-period. And I felt exactly the same about it (as Andy is at this point well aware...). But that doesn't change my point, because a 24-hour ban is a pretty minimal punishment whereas the perma-ban is not. It's easy enough to accept a minimal punishment, but not such a severe one. <chuckle>

Well, if you were banned lets say 5 more times, over the weeks for such (real or imagined) offenses, then your punishment wouldn't continue to be minimal, would it?

Law, without force, is impotent.
-Pascal

I see many people taking this approach. "Those were the rules" "This is how every forum does it" "The mods here are actually very lenient" etc.

We are trying to show that the LAWS ARE WRONG. What you are saying is irrelevant to the point. The point is that no amount of small offenses should lead to a permaban

Tell you what, F1fth, I'll answer these questions with my honest answers from the point of view as an admin. However, I want you to respect those answers and understand that the answers are not going to please everyone as well as refrain from dragging things through the mud when I'm finished. Sound like a deal?

-Do you think permabans should only be issued when absolutely necessary?

Yes, I think that permanent forum bans should be used as a final measure to ensure the stability of the community. However, in the effort to ensure that stability, I also believe that if a user has received numerous warnings and punishments that a permanent forum ban can be warranted to prevent problems from arising if the user has demonstrated that they are here in the community to be a general nuisance and very little else, regardless of how popular they may be with some forum regulars.

Stability? That is the only factor? What about quality?
I mean if all you want is stability, then just delete off-topics and general discussion and create a "Congratulate your friends forum", where people can brag. Then you would just delete any post marginally off-topic, only discussions about maps would go in the map subforum, only suggestions would go in the suggestion subforum, only discussion about tactics would go in the training forum. Voilla, perfect stability.

About being a "general nuisance". What does that even mean? I'm sure that a lot of us are annoyed by some posters, does that make them a nuisance? Are we running a pure democracy here, 50% +1 say you are annoying and that's it, you get the perma ban?
Everyone seems to say "Oh, he was so funny and witty, he made me laugh, etc; but he broke the rules" Like the rules are engraved on divine golden platters that came down from the sky. If he was funny, witty etc, then he was not detracting from the community. If he goes overboard, it makes sense to punish him with a temporary ban to get him on the right track again, it does not make sense to permanently remove someone who added to the community. If the rules indicate that someone who adds to the community should be permanently banned, then the RULES ARE WRONG.

-Do you think the community is better (as a whole, not personally) without DM around?

Yes, I do, and please let me explain why. During Dancing Mustard's self-imposed sabbatical from Conquer Club the moderation team and the admins especially enduring a very large drop in complaints about the atmosphere in the forum as a whole. Was Dancing Mustard the only cause for those complaints? No, he was not, they are largely brought about by a chosen few forum regulars (who I shall not name out of respect and a wish to avoid mud-slinging). Upon his return, the number of general complaints about him and others who followed his lead began to rise dramatically, at least in respect to the work that I do personally as an admin, I cannot speak for the other three members of the admin team.

I am entirely willing to admit that over my time here at Conquer Club I have laughed out loud on many occasions due to the wit of Dancing Mustard, and at times I've thought he was dead on with his ideas and thoughts, but that does not change the fact that not everyone saw him as some sort of hero or personality figure in the forum, and as admins it is our jobs to try and make decisions that will benefit the greater number of people. Many here don't believe the decision to ban Dancing Mustard permanently is of benefit, but what everyone also needs to remember is that what you see here in the publicly viewed forums is not the entire story of the impact he had on the community. Think what you will about that, but it is the truth.

So you're saying it is mob rule. "Enough people complain and we get rid of him". So if i gather 20 friends from around the forums and start reporting every post person X makes that is even remotely inappropriate, i have to assume that soon person X would be leaving us.
I have to say this doesn't seem like a very good system. What if the people reporting it aren't doing so out of the noblest reasons? What is the ones reporting are actually biased?

-Do you think the community should get any input as to what is best for the community?

I don't think that the community at large should be put in charge of discussing who should and should not be permanently banned, no. I think that will lead to many more problems than it would solve. However, I do think that the community can be allowed to have a voice in deciding certain things that will ultimately provide what is best for the community. Case in point is the not so far in the past situation revolving around bigotry/racism and the policies that should be enforced regarding such things. The community was clamoring for more definitive punishment procedures and out of that came quite a productive discussion about consistency, the difference between major and minor forum infractions, and many other things. As a result of the community input AndyDufresne was able to determine two new ladders for escalating punishments, one for major infractions, and one for minor infractions.

Interestingly enough, the community was quite pleased when Andy made it known that the new ladders were in place and he explained how they would be used, but now that they are being enforced and someone who is "beloved" by the community is the victim all of the sudden these new ladders of punishment are inadequate and absurd. I find it quite interesting to see the same people who praised the new ladders now tearing them down as absurd, but that is simply my personal opinion.

I agree, you can't simply post a thread: "Ban DM? Yay or Nay", but as has been suggested, i think it would be good to gauge the impact on the community of someone before deciding on appropriate punishment. Some form of being able to say: "i enjoy this user's posts, he makes the forum more pleasurable to read" would be welcome.

-Finally, do you think shortening the term of DM's ban to a temporary one would cause a problem?

Yes, I do believe that it would. He was punished according to the new punishment system that the community was calling for and he received the proper punishment within that system. To reverse the decision will not only make the system worthless, but it will also require many other bans to be reversed as well, something that is not favorable in the least.

I am sorry that i was not aware of the previous discussion of the system. However, as i have said i disagree with the current system. You are right, DM's punishment shouldn't just be reversed, that would make no sense, what would make sense is to modify the system.

[Iliad]

But it would be better for the community, you know that thing the mods are trying to help. Thing is though, the community doesn't really need too much help. There will be the over the top racist or the troll which inundates every single thread and derails it about himself, but otherwise communities don't need much help.

I remember all the fuss when dugcarr got permabanned. There was a huge controversy about it. He cheated and he wanted to directly try and hurt the site. The permaban was brought out then, and deserved. Look how it is used now. A post, which was debatably worth even a warning, is now worth a permaban. Bans are handed out with less and less care. A permaban needs to be handed out to the worst of the worst, someone who definitely was having a far too detrimental effect on the community. Community. Mods don't ban people who are detrimental to the community, they ban those who are detrimental to mods. Which then leads to resentment from the community, which leads to more outbursts, and more crackdowns from mods. A vicious cycle.

The purpose of bans is to maintain a healthy forum, instead they are antagonising the community and the moderators. The community won't be improved by the banning of Dancing Mustard. It will just lose one of its best posters. There was a period of more hands-off moderating and it was nice. The community had fun, the mods were relaxed. But now we're back to mods abusing power, only hurting the community. Mods-you are supposed to help the community. Not you, not lack, us the community. And I hardly think the community's needs were thought of here.

The other thing that needs to stop is the "The moderators are always right" kind of thinking. No, they're not. We're all human, we all make mistakes. Some of us more often than others, and with an alarming degree but still. Clapper is thought to be one of the best mods because she has the guts to admit when she has made a mistake. She admits when she locked or merged a thread for no reason, and she undoes her decision. Moderators who make mistakes, crack down harshly selectively, will only earn resentment when they're obviously trying to defend what's wrong. Moderators need to realise that they're not the police, we're not the workers who have to obey. We're the customers, some still potential, others hooked for the next year. All this "The moderators are always right" and "If you don't like it, leave" mentality is only hurting business.

When moderating, the communities needs should be examined, not the moderators. Let's have a more hands-off approach from the moderators, for a better environment and much less work for the mods.

[Woodruff]

I actually got a 24-hour ban for a post that I made to you, as well...and probably over the same time-period. And I felt exactly the same about it (as Andy is at this point well aware...). But that doesn't change my point, because a 24-hour ban is a pretty minimal punishment whereas the perma-ban is not. It's easy enough to accept a minimal punishment, but not such a severe one. <chuckle>

Well, if you were banned lets say 5 more times, over the weeks for such (real or imagined) offenses, then your punishment wouldn't continue to be minimal, would it?

The key, of course, is that I would not be. Unlike some, I am able to understand the concept of consequences and act in my own best interests as well as with decency toward others.

Law, without force, is impotent.
-Pascal

I see many people taking this approach. "Those were the rules" "This is how every forum does it" "The mods here are actually very lenient" etc.
We are trying to show that the LAWS ARE WRONG. What you are saying is irrelevant to the point. The point is that no amount of small offenses should lead to a permaban

That is your opinion, and there's nothing wrong with that. But we don't all agree on that subject, I'm quite certain.

-Do you think permabans should only be issued when absolutely necessary?
Yes, I think that permanent forum bans should be used as a final measure to ensure the stability of the community. However, in the effort to ensure that stability, I also believe that if a user has received numerous warnings and punishments that a permanent forum ban can be warranted to prevent problems from arising if the user has demonstrated that they are here in the community to be a general nuisance and very little else, regardless of how popular they may be with some forum regulars.

Stability? That is the only factor? What about quality?
I mean if all you want is stability, then just delete off-topics and general discussion and create a "Congratulate your friends forum", where people can brag. Then you would just delete any post marginally off-topic, only discussions about maps would go in the map subforum, only suggestions would go in the suggestion subforum, only discussion about tactics would go in the training forum. Voilla, perfect stability.

Surely, you can recognize that ISN'T what the result would be, right? Surely?

About being a "general nuisance". What does that even mean? I'm sure that a lot of us are annoyed by some posters, does that make them a nuisance? Are we running a pure democracy here, 50% +1 say you are annoying and that's it, you get the perma ban?
Everyone seems to say "Oh, he was so funny and witty, he made me laugh, etc; but he broke the rules" Like the rules are engraved on divine golden platters that came down from the sky. If he was funny, witty etc, then he was not detracting from the community.

He was occasionally very funny, with lots of not-funny in between.

If he goes overboard, it makes sense to punish him with a temporary ban to get him on the right track again

Clearly, after that many warnings and bans already, "getting him on the right track again" simply was not happening.

it does not make sense to permanently remove someone who added to the community. If the rules indicate that someone who adds to the community should be permanently banned, then the RULES ARE WRONG.

"He added to the community" is definitely an opinion.

-Do you think the community is better (as a whole, not personally) without DM around?

Yes, I do, and please let me explain why. During Dancing Mustard's self-imposed sabbatical from Conquer Club the moderation team and the admins especially enduring a very large drop in complaints about the atmosphere in the forum as a whole. Was Dancing Mustard the only cause for those complaints? No, he was not, they are largely brought about by a chosen few forum regulars (who I shall not name out of respect and a wish to avoid mud-slinging). Upon his return, the number of general complaints about him and others who followed his lead began to rise dramatically, at least in respect to the work that I do personally as an admin, I cannot speak for the other three members of the admin team.
I am entirely willing to admit that over my time here at Conquer Club I have laughed out loud on many occasions due to the wit of Dancing Mustard, and at times I've thought he was dead on with his ideas and thoughts, but that does not change the fact that not everyone saw him as some sort of hero or personality figure in the forum, and as admins it is our jobs to try and make decisions that will benefit the greater number of people. Many here don't believe the decision to ban Dancing Mustard permanently is of benefit, but what everyone also needs to remember is that what you see here in the publicly viewed forums is not the entire story of the impact he had on the community. Think what you will about that, but it is the truth.

So you're saying it is mob rule. "Enough people complain and we get rid of him".

It seems quite apparent to me in reading the forums lately that if this were "mob rule", DM would be back already.

[xelabale]

[quote="Woodruff"]Or, if they're going to have a complaint button, have a karma button too, where we can click to let people know that we appreciate and value the post, instead of only ever sending negative messages to the mods./quote]
That's a remarkably good and positive suggestion.

[Woodruff]

Or, if they're going to have a complaint button, have a karma button too, where we can click to let people know that we appreciate and value the post, instead of only ever sending negative messages to the mods.

That's a remarkably good and positive suggestion.

It wasn't my suggestion. However, I would suggest that such a thing would lead to decisions simply being popularity contests. Assholes can then be free to be assholes as long as their asshole friends will vote for them. That doesn't seem to be a positive system for the good of the community, in my view.

I think the INTENT of the suggestion above is a good one. I just think the implementation would not be.

[Simon Viavant]

I would think it'd be good for the community because it's the COMMUNITY who's giving the karma buttons. If someone has a problem with someone and thinks the majority of the community are assholes, that's their problem.

[Fircoal]

For the people that complain to the site about DM... who are these people? As we can see most of the forum regulars like having DM around, so how is he damaging the community? I mean most of the people who I around like DM, so then who's doing the complaining? If people who have posted a couple of times and don't really have been on the CC forums much at all, then to put it bluntly, who cares? The people who have been around for a while and check the site daily are the community, not the people who just check it on a whim. It should be for those who post in the forum daily.

Also I think that the forums should be done a bit separately. Of course this probably got killed when flame wars went down, but boards have different communities, some mind things more than others. I think that the mods should shape things to their communities rather than a mod's dream.

And yes I know this post is really bad. It's late and I'm choosing all the wrong words. xwx It sounds better in my head...

[pimpdave]

Law, without force, is impotent.

So then you side strongly with the moderators on this issue, I take it?

Who ever said this was a siding with the moderators thing, anyway?

See, this is just more of that subtle divisive malarkey that goes on here. If what got DM banned was so bad, you should get banned too, because this damages the community and turns it into an us vs. them relationship, which they are constantly saying isn't how they want the site run, that they want a community.

The fact is, the mods should be on OUR side. It should never be a question of whether we're on their side... So when they go permabanning people who NEVER HARMED THE COMMUNITY it just reinforces that they aren't on our side, and never will be.

It severely damages morale. I would love to see a cogent argument from any of you who "side the mods" about how their recent actions do not damage morale or even boost it. No one has yet even bothered to take on the substance of my OP, and even when Optimus Prime was in here, he was being defensive and never bothered to engage the substance of my OP, which is even further discouraging.

In fact, he won't even address me directly, he refers to me in passing saying, to the effect of: "pimpdave should get it straight that Night Strike is allowed to abuse his power whenever he wants, and Twill's gross abuses of power and efforts to play favorites and be a self-destructive divisive influence will never be over turned."

This further deflates morale.

Come on guys, don't be so stubborn and retarded about this. Shed the shadow of Twill and actually DO SOMETHING GOOD.

For starters, don't ban us just because you want to assassinate us, like you did with Dancing Mustard. Instead, only ban us if you ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO. Otherwise, we're constantly going to be wondering what trumped up and manufactured reason you'll think of to get rid of us, just because you decided you didn't like us, for whatever petty and stupid reason you would have to hate your supporters and customers. It makes no sense.


The mods should instead be thinking that they are USERS FIRST. And so could be banned just like we can. Imagine there was a rotating schedule of who gets to be admin. So then, if a person like Twill comes back, and decides to go on a crusade of aggregating power and executing dissidents, he should know that the next admin could just as easily do the same to him, and he will only make himself a pariah by being an unjust and overreactionary leader.

There is no reason to respect Optimus Prime's opinion. Optimus Prime shouldn't respect his own opinion, instead, he should be respecting OUR opinion. That's what a good admin does on healthy forums, anyway. Also, tell people to use the ignore button more often. Especially with guys like DM, who AREN'T HARMING THE SITE OR THE COMMUNITY, they just like to run their mouths off, so if you're not a fan, don't read them.

Pretty simple. Keeps everyone happy. What's so hard to understand about this?

And don't go appealing to your extant rules. You're using them for things they weren't intended for in the first place, and they're broken and need to be mended.

[captain.crazy]

Law, without force, is impotent.

So then you side strongly with the moderators on this issue, I take it?

Who ever said this was a siding with the moderators thing, anyway?

See, this is just more of that subtle divisive malarkey that goes on here. If what got DM banned was so bad, you should get banned too, because this damages the community and turns it into an us vs. them relationship, which they are constantly saying isn't how they want the site run, that they want a community.

The fact is, the mods should be on OUR side. It should never be a question of whether we're on their side... So when they go permabanning people who NEVER HARMED THE COMMUNITY it just reinforces that they aren't on our side, and never will be.

It severely damages morale. I would love to see a cogent argument from any of you who "side the mods" about how their recent actions do not damage morale or even boost it. No one has yet even bothered to take on the substance of my OP, and even when Optimus Prime was in here, he was being defensive and never bothered to engage the substance of my OP, which is even further discouraging.

In fact, he won't even address me directly, he refers to me in passing saying, to the effect of: "pimpdave should get it straight that Night Strike is allowed to abuse his power whenever he wants, and Twill's gross abuses of power and efforts to play favorites and be a self-destructive divisive influence will never be over turned."

This further deflates morale.

Come on guys, don't be so stubborn and retarded about this. Shed the shadow of Twill and actually DO SOMETHING GOOD.

For starters, don't ban us just because you want to assassinate us, like you did with Dancing Mustard. Instead, only ban us if you ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO. Otherwise, we're constantly going to be wondering what trumped up and manufactured reason you'll think of to get rid of us, just because you decided you didn't like us, for whatever petty and stupid reason you would have to hate your supporters and customers. It makes no sense.


The mods should instead be thinking that they are USERS FIRST. And so could be banned just like we can. Imagine there was a rotating schedule of who gets to be admin. So then, if a person like Twill comes back, and decides to go on a crusade of aggregating power and executing dissidents, he should know that the next admin could just as easily do the same to him, and he will only make himself a pariah by being an unjust and overreactionary leader.

There is no reason to respect Optimus Prime's opinion. Optimus Prime shouldn't respect his own opinion, instead, he should be respecting OUR opinion. That's what a good admin does on healthy forums, anyway. Also, tell people to use the ignore button more often. Especially with guys like DM, who AREN'T HARMING THE SITE OR THE COMMUNITY, they just like to run their mouths off, so if you're not a fan, don't read them.

Pretty simple. Keeps everyone happy. What's so hard to understand about this?

And don't go appealing to your extant rules. You're using them for things they weren't intended for in the first place, and they're broken and need to be mended.

This is the longest post I have ever seen from you dude. usually you espress yourself with a mod edit picture, or gif... or a lame video.

BTW...

tldr.

[pimpdave]

-Do you think permabans should only be issued when absolutely necessary?

Yes, I think that permanent forum bans should be used as a final measure to ensure the stability of the community. However, in the effort to ensure that stability, I also believe that if a user has received numerous warnings and punishments that a permanent forum ban can be warranted to prevent problems from arising if the user has demonstrated that they are here in the community to be a general nuisance and very little else, regardless of how popular they may be with some forum regulars.

So are you completely going to disregard the OP of this thread? I laid out up front why the nuisance is necessary to the site. People are going to complain about the nuisance, that's part of the never ending cycle of human drama, but when the nuisance is gone, we see how much we're missing without that nuisance, or antagonist. There will be conflict on an internet forum no matter what. The question is, what kind of conflict will it be? Will it be really nasty stuff, or the witty banter the likes of which are generated by the recently departed.

Which is why you mods must stop and think for a minute about what you're actually doing here, and what your purpose is.

Most people on this forum find the likes of captain.crazy to be a nuisance. A big time nuisance. But most of us opposed to his posts aren't going to advocate for a permanent ban! We need the conflict for this to be a healthy board. You see how short the threads are when people agree.

-Do you think the community is better (as a whole, not personally) without DM around?

Yes, I do, and please let me explain why. During Dancing Mustard's self-imposed sabbatical from Conquer Club the moderation team and the admins especially enduring a very large drop in complaints about the atmosphere in the forum as a whole. Was Dancing Mustard the only cause for those complaints? No, he was not, they are largely brought about by a chosen few forum regulars (who I shall not name out of respect and a wish to avoid mud-slinging). Upon his return, the number of general complaints about him and others who followed his lead began to rise dramatically, at least in respect to the work that I do personally as an admin, I cannot speak for the other three members of the admin team.

I am entirely willing to admit that over my time here at Conquer Club I have laughed out loud on many occasions due to the wit of Dancing Mustard, and at times I've thought he was dead on with his ideas and thoughts, but that does not change the fact that not everyone saw him as some sort of hero or personality figure in the forum, and as admins it is our jobs to try and make decisions that will benefit the greater number of people. Many here don't believe the decision to ban Dancing Mustard permanently is of benefit, but what everyone also needs to remember is that what you see here in the publicly viewed forums is not the entire story of the impact he had on the community. Think what you will about that, but it is the truth.

How can you claim that banning someone is of the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people when you refuse to even consider the possibility of just recommending the aggrieved put the antagonist on ignore?

You have to consider the long term impact of your actions. And as much as you can say that what you see in the public forums isn't the whole story, we can say the same. I'd like to think that a bunch of possible complaints to you have been averted by PMing in private. I always try to settle things on my own and seldom ever report people.

So I still think that to base your decision on the number of complaints you receive isn't legitimate, considering you are still doing the work of a particular faction on the board in doing so, and not representing all of us, the way a good admin does. Sure, a large number of complaints can be a good indicator, but it's not the only one. In the case of a Dancing Mustard, who is merely prolific and generates lots of high quality content, the answer really should be to have everyone who doesn't like him put him on ignore.

-Do you think the community should get any input as to what is best for the community?

However, I do think that the community can be allowed to have a voice in deciding certain things that will ultimately provide what is best for the community.

Interestingly enough, the community was quite pleased when Andy made it known that the new ladders were in place and he explained how they would be used, but now that they are being enforced and someone who is "beloved" by the community is the victim all of the sudden these new ladders of punishment are inadequate and absurd. I find it quite interesting to see the same people who praised the new ladders now tearing them down as absurd, but that is simply my personal opinion.

Who said this? If you don't provide sources, then they don't exist. You can't make this claim without calling out the people you are referring to. And don't give me some "silent majority" baloney. And here we are, letting you know what the community wants. The people who don't want Dancing Mustard back can put him on ignore. He's harmless if you don't listen to him and he's not trying to give people viruses, or spread around personal information that could damage our real lives.

-Finally, do you think shortening the term of DM's ban to a temporary one would cause a problem?

Yes, I do believe that it would. He was punished according to the new punishment system that the community was calling for and he received the proper punishment within that system. To reverse the decision will not only make the system worthless, but it will also require many other bans to be reversed as well, something that is not favorable in the least.

No, it would not make the system worthless, it would help strengthen the system. Because it would assure everyone they won't just be assassinated for taking a contrary view to the ruling class. (And hey mods, stop thinking of yourselves as the ruling class, it's a sure fire forum killer)

Also, no, you can't claim it would require many other bans to be reversed as well without citing them, because otherwise you pull this boogeyman card that we can't even be sure exists. The new punishment guidelines are punitive and divisive. Your facility with permanent banning will ultimately be your undoing Optimus Prime.


Go watch The Great Escape, please. I updated my OP with a link to it on YouTube. You need to understand the intrinsic and necessary conflict in a forum. You guys are supposed to be the guards who know it's a sport to always try to "break out", or push the limits, so you can lock us up in the cooler, but you're not supposed to line us up and mow us down...

It destroys the balance. It makes things boring for everyone.