Discussion of banned/suspended members - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > ZOOTV > Inside Broadcast
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-04-2007, 07:30 AM   #1
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 06:43 PM
Discussion of banned/suspended members

Half of the problems of yesterday arose because of the constant threat of the rule prohibiting discussion of banned/suspended members. The issues brought up by this rule and similar extensions of it are what turned what would have been dozens of posts into hundreds of posts.

Discussion of a suspended member can help others understand what he/she did wrong, hopefully preventing similar actions in the future. It can, perhaps, also take the "ooh! ahh!" factor away from the suspension, making it less of a hot topic in a few days; the current rule of 'no discussion' does the opposite----the mention of jick or Fake Edge brings on laughs and a string of posts still to this day.

I don't know if this rule was enacted because of Fake Edge, jick, or whomever. But I think that we should really take a look at what the purpose of the rule is and if it really accomplishes that goal. I doubt it does. Much of the mods' warnings yesterday were merely to enforce this rule simply because it's a rule, but not necessarily with some higher purpose in mind.
__________________

__________________
Utoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2007, 08:25 AM   #2
45:33
 
cobl04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Point to Shaolin
Posts: 55,037
Local Time: 09:43 AM
I don't feel as strongly about it, but it did take me about an hour to click as to why there were dogs everywhere.
__________________

__________________
cobl04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2007, 09:39 AM   #3
Halloweenhead
Forum Moderator
 
Bonochick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cherry Lane
Posts: 40,816
Local Time: 06:43 PM

This is my personal opinion. This isn't an official Interference opinion or anything, just what I think.

I think discussion of banned members should be allowed...in one, informative thread. I don't think there should be talk and references scattered all over though. It makes things cluttered, especially when such talk derails an existing topic. If people really just want some information and a place to voice opinions and concerns, one thread should be all that is necessary.

Currently, I do my best to squash conversation that pops up, because that is the rule, and I'm just doing my job by enforcing said rule. I'm personally not opposed to changing that though.
__________________
"Knight in shining Zubaz."

Bonochick [at] interference.com
Bonochick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2007, 10:12 AM   #4
Blue Crack Addict
 
mikal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Black Lodge
Posts: 24,910
Local Time: 04:43 PM
^^^^^^^^^

i think that would be a great compromise.
__________________
mikal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2007, 10:22 AM   #5
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
ylimeU2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,471
Local Time: 06:43 PM
I can understand why the bannings shouldn't be discussed, for a couple of different reasons.

First, I see it as talking about someone behind their back. Which, on some level everyone does, but that doesn't make it fair. In fact, I've always assumed the no discussion of banned members rule was for this very reason. Allowing it would be like the mods saying it is okay to talk shit about someone, as long as they aren't around to see it.

Secondly, as is the most recent case, talking about it tends to start arguments. Most people who have posted here for a while or just have a lot of posts have both people who like them and people who hate them. Consequently, those who are friends will defend the one being banned and those who aren't will back it up.

I think most of the time, it is obvious why someone has been banned, as was the case with jick. I can't imagine someone on this board not understanding why and needing clarification so as to not make the same mistake. And if you don't, my personal opinion is that you should bring that up privately with the mods, which, as I understand it, they are open to.

However, I don't see the harm in talking about it, as long as it is under control (which I've already said tends to be a problem). I don't think people should be allowed to go around saying "I'm so glad suchandsuch is gone. What a jerk s/he was". And if it is starts any kind of argument, it should be closed immediately.
__________________
ylimeU2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2007, 10:48 AM   #6
Sizzlin' Sicilian
Forum Administrator
 
Sicy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 69,297
Local Time: 02:43 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ylimeU2
I can understand why the bannings shouldn't be discussed, for a couple of different reasons.

First, I see it as talking about someone behind their back. Which, on some level everyone does, but that doesn't make it fair. In fact, I've always assumed the no discussion of banned members rule was for this very reason. Allowing it would be like the mods saying it is okay to talk shit about someone, as long as they aren't around to see it.

Secondly, as is the most recent case, talking about it tends to start arguments. Most people who have posted here for a while or just have a lot of posts have both people who like them and people who hate them. Consequently, those who are friends will defend the one being banned and those who aren't will back it up.

I think most of the time, it is obvious why someone has been banned, as was the case with jick. I can't imagine someone on this board not understanding why and needing clarification so as to not make the same mistake. And if you don't, my personal opinion is that you should bring that up privately with the mods, which, as I understand it, they are open to.

However, I don't see the harm in talking about it, as long as it is under control (which I've already said tends to be a problem). I don't think people should be allowed to go around saying "I'm so glad suchandsuch is gone. What a jerk s/he was". And if it is starts any kind of argument, it should be closed immediately.
Everything about this post is spot on. I agree with all points.
__________________
Sicy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2007, 11:10 AM   #7
Halloweenhead
Forum Moderator
 
Bonochick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cherry Lane
Posts: 40,816
Local Time: 06:43 PM

I think one thing that really bothers me is that when some people are suspended or banned is that there are people who seem to honestly not realize why it's happening...they think the member has done no wrong. Would it be helpful to link to some of the offending posts when the banning or suspension is posted about in Inside Broadcast? I guess the main reason I'm finding myself leaning more towards allowing discussion is because I want people to be aware of why this action was taken. I've always felt that as a mod we shouldn't have to defend our decisions, since we truly make decisions for the right reasons, not just personal agendas or something of that nature, which I think some people seem to think. However, if having some solid proof like that would be more helpful to people, perhaps that is an option to consider.
__________________
"Knight in shining Zubaz."

Bonochick [at] interference.com
Bonochick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2007, 11:25 AM   #8
LMP
Blue Crack Supplier
 
LMP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 37,609
Local Time: 04:43 PM
I agree with that, but the only problem if you quote one post as an example for a suspension/banning, it could be taken completely out-of-context in the first place. I don't see that any different than someone quoting a line of someone's post and spinning it into their own agenda. I'm not saying that you would do that, but I think it would achieve the same effect.
__________________
LMP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2007, 11:25 AM   #9
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 63,728
Local Time: 02:43 PM
I just wanted to say I'm happy to see this very topic being discussed, and that the mods are open to discussion. It makes me feel better about Interference as a community.
__________________
corianderstem is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2007, 11:41 AM   #10
Halloweenhead
Forum Moderator
 
Bonochick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cherry Lane
Posts: 40,816
Local Time: 06:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by LemonMacPhisto
I agree with that, but the only problem if you quote one post as an example for a suspension/banning, it could be taken completely out-of-context in the first place. I don't see that any different than someone quoting a line of someone's post and spinning it into their own agenda. I'm not saying that you would do that, but I think it would achieve the same effect.
I did consider that, I have the same concern. People may want to challenge individual posts...linking to posts made by other members that they think are worse, things like that. It could potentially just make things worse.
__________________
"Knight in shining Zubaz."

Bonochick [at] interference.com
Bonochick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2007, 12:22 PM   #11
Blue Crack Addict
 
Screwtape2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Omaha, Nebraska “With Screwtape on Kettle Drum and Wormwood on Harpsichord!”
Posts: 18,353
Local Time: 05:43 PM
I think I have a compromise. After someone is banned or suspended for something other than spamming, a thread can be started here where it can be discussed. After a week it gets closed and the matter is never spoke of again. That would give bannings and suspensions a little more transparency which it seems most people want. Would the mods consider something like that?
__________________
Screwtape2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2007, 02:47 PM   #12
Paper Gods
Forum Administrator
 
KhanadaRhodes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: a vampire in the limousine
Posts: 60,609
Local Time: 04:43 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Bonochick
This is my personal opinion. This isn't an official Interference opinion or anything, just what I think.

I think discussion of banned members should be allowed...in one, informative thread. I don't think there should be talk and references scattered all over though. It makes things cluttered, especially when such talk derails an existing topic. If people really just want some information and a place to voice opinions and concerns, one thread should be all that is necessary.

Currently, I do my best to squash conversation that pops up, because that is the rule, and I'm just doing my job by enforcing said rule. I'm personally not opposed to changing that though.
i agree with everything bonochick said. as long as the discussion was limited to one thread i think it'd be great, but since the rule is right now to not allow it, i've been enforcing it. like everyone's said, it'd help clear up any questions anyone had and help solve disputes for anyone who disagreed with the actions taken.

everyone has to be held accountable for their actions and although i know we don't just ban/suspend people for the fun of it, it might not always look that way to everyone else. i don't even remember when the "don't talk about banned people" rule came about, part of me is wanting to think it's been a rule for at least a few years now.
__________________
KhanadaRhodes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2007, 03:35 PM   #13
Sizzlin' Sicilian
Forum Administrator
 
Sicy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 69,297
Local Time: 02:43 PM
I believe it started 3 years ago per Elvis' request.

http://forum.interference.com/t123956.html

I dont mind bending the rules at this point and letting some discussion about banned members continue in the Inside Broadcast thread in Zoo Confessionals, but I'm not fond of the idea of starting a new thread for every banned member.
__________________
Sicy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2007, 06:26 PM   #14
Blue Crack Supplier
 
~BrightestStar~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Gettin' hot in a photobooth....livin it up in Ikeaville
Posts: 35,735
Local Time: 06:43 PM
PS. All the doggy avatars are cute!!

Somehow, I feel that if we started threads for every banned member, it would only be asking for trouble. And it would often be completely unnecessary.

What Sicy said is probably best, keeping any and all (mature) discussion contained within the ZC thread.

Also, as for posting examples of theards/posts of the offenders misbehavior, it would likely only lead to complaints of things being skewed out of context and misrepresented. If someone is really curious to discover why someone has been banned/suspened, it's quite easy to do a search for their posts and/or ask a mod.


I'd also just like to second what Corianderstem has said.
__________________
~BrightestStar~ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2007, 06:44 PM   #15
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 06:43 PM
I don't think that a thread for each banned person is a solution either. Perhaps one thread for discussion of all bannings----i.e., the IB thread in ZC, but not quite. However, I also don't think that quashing any discussion of a banning that isn't in that single thread is a right way to go. It really isn't like the discussion will take over every section of the forum. It did with U2Man's banning because of 1) the nature of U2Man and those of us who 'know' him, and 2) to spite what many of us felt was an over-the-top response to our immediate reactions. I agree 100% that it would be disruptive and pretty crappy if discussion of banned members "took over" Interference. But, even if discussion of a banning does "take over," it won't last for more than but a few days. Just because there are posts in multiple threads--as long as the threads stay on topic for the most part (almost no thread here is 100% on topic)---then those posts aren't "clutter." Honestly, how can we call that clutter and accept all the crap "clutter" threads of links, videos, pictures, and articles that have been posted in the last few months in Lemonade Stand?

When I was in high school, a teacher was arrested for reportedly having sex with a student. Within an hour, the principal stated over the intercom that any students caught discussing the arrest would be given detention or suspended. How do you think that made us feel? It did nothing to stop us from talking about it and it killed our good impression of our principal. He did it as an attempt to stem what he feared would become chaos. What would have happened is that we all would have talked about it for a week and then it would have died out. What happened instead is that we talked about it until the end of the school year & after & we hated our principal. If, instead, they had put us all in a room to discuss it, it would have been so much better--kind of like a single thread for discussion. Still, though, we would have occasionally talked about residual feelings, etc., in the hallways. It would have been stupid for them to punish us for each small hallway or back-of-class discussion, just as it would be silly to punish every single few-post discussion outside of the main thread. But the classroom discussion, or the single thread for banning discussion, would likely decrease the discussions elsewhere.

Take Fake Edge. He's the worst blunder Interference has encountered, right? People still talk about it (technically, we shouldn't be allowed to, huh..). Does it destroy Interference? Do we run amok derailing threads daily with Fake Edge jokes? No. There was a shitload of trouble at the time, it died out, and now we get a Fake Edge joke every three months in a thread that usually stays on topic. Allowing discussion of U2Man or any other banned member can do nothing compared to that.
__________________

__________________
Utoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com