Re: Bans
 

[ QUOTE ]
what am i being left out on here?

what underlying issues? are you two having an affair?

[/ QUOTE ]

mat,

depends on how you define the word 'are'

Re: Bans
 

http://www.worldgalleryonline.com/le...sl_bagle_4.jpg

Re: Bans
 

Ryan, fwiw Ill probably assume that the lack of comment on wookies post about the 'Less Hugs, More Bans' gimmick bans in this thread basically means that you dont have a problem with fun non-serious bans as long as they are kept within the forum and the users themselves are fine with them. So even though the joke has largely run its course Ill be happy to stop them asap if asked and Ill probably just assume that these funbans were the trigger for this thread unless I hear otherwise.

Ozi

[ QUOTE ]
I feel like I need to comment here for Ryan's sake, largely because I have been more than filling my ban quota lately and may be responsible for this thread more than I'd like to be. Over in Micro, we've been running a ban gimmick for the last couple weeks. It came about because of the appearance of a troll, albeit a funny one, and then a great poster telling him "Less hugs, more bans." I picked that for the title of our NC thread and joked about being stressed out (true) and having an itch ban finger. People made a game out of it, and the gimmick was born. Aussie and I have been frivolously banning people for minutes or hours tops, not for punitive or correctional reasons, but for fun and sport. It's the forum's best posters that are getting micro-banned, not people who are actually misbehaving. For the most part, the response has been fun and positive, generally good for a cheap laugh. The gimmick is nearing the point when it stops being funny and starts being passe, but if you want me to stop this immediately rather than letting it die a natural death, I can arrange it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Bans
 

[ QUOTE ]
means that you dont have a problem with fun non-serious bans as long as they are kept within the forum and the users themselves are fine with them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct, and those bans didn't inspire this thread. Should have replied to wookie about that.

Re: Bans
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With over 123,000 registered users

[/ QUOTE ]

where are you getting this number?

[/ QUOTE ]

i looked at the "welcome our newest member" thing, or whatever, and looked at what his member number was. if i was really motivated i could tell you the total number of unbanned accounts, the total number of posters who have posted in the last week (eh, i think i could tell you this one), or the total number of unique IPs used, or a variety of other things like that.

but for that number up there, i just went old school.

Re: Bans
 

Ryan,

Can you give us some examples of bans you think aren't "right".

I think I see where you're going, but I'd like to know more before trying to respond.

Re: Bans
 

here's an example of a ban that is just effing awful

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...age=0&vc=1

reason for ban: "poker metaphors in bbv4l"

bans like these are completely ridiculous. if kyle was making these sorts of bans on a regular basis it's just better that he's gone.

Re: Bans
 

nation, the guy had 1 post and it ws ony a 1 day ban. iam not a kyleb supp. but i thuh that ban was fine

Re: Bans
 

oh cmon nick. bans are supposed to be for people who break the rules of 2p2 or who are intentionally tarding up the forums. he made one post in a long thread, it's not like he started a new thread relating something to women in poker metaphors.

Re: Bans
 

and even then if it was clear he was a troll continually starting crappy new thread topics would it be acceptable to ban him.

Re: Bans
 

That account has not posted again in the last ten days. It may be a customer we pushed to our competitors? Would a one minute suspension or just a pm warning have been ok?

Thank you,

Jim Kuhn
Catfish4u
[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

Re: Bans
 

[ QUOTE ]
That account has not posted again in the last ten days. It may be a customer we pushed to our competitors? Would a one minute suspension or just a pm warning have been ok?

Thank you,

Jim Kuhn
Catfish4u
[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

what competitors? the guy probably had another acct or made a new 1

Re: Bans
 

nick, what you don't realize is a lot of new users haven't been around the internet that much. they know how to use it to google stuff, check email, look at porn, and thats about it. there are tons of people who don't use message boards regularly. i was like that when i first joined here.

it would be very likely for him to make a new account, post that (and yes, there are lots of people who use poker metaphors), and then when he couldnt log in or anything thought he was completely banned, didnt know to clear cookies and/or make a new account. or maybe that was his first foray into 2+2 so when he was banned he didn't miss it or anything and just never bothered to come back. that's called pushing away potential traffic.

in other words, stop the bans for non-intentionally sucky posts.

Re: Bans
 

what i'm trying to say is you have to stop assuming that people are going to want their fix of 2p2 and a ban is never going to turn them away. only the regulars who have been assimilated into the community are going to want to come back.

it's the repeat offenders (like edd) who everyone says is sooo valuable to the forums but really just tard it up and make every attempt to break all rules that need to be permabanned. those guys will not leave and will just make new accounts. those are the ones who need to be punished and taught a lesson so they stop shtting the bed.

fwiw, i don't think he should have been banned after first asking dids, then asking again to make sure dids saw the hidden image. that was on dids. then again, he should have been permabanned long ago.

Re: Bans
 

nation is at the core here totally right.

the ban he pointed out was absolutely uncalled for.

kyle wanted to be like censored so badly that he brought a stupid oot rule to b4l. unfortunately for him, no dice. people can feel free to use stupid poker metaphors.

Re: Bans
 

nation makes some good points

Re: Bans
 

[ QUOTE ]
nation makes some good points

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed.

OTOH, I thing a lot of mods feel disgruntled as some(all) of their tools are ineffective.

Re: Bans
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
nation makes some good points

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed.

OTOH, I thing a lot of mods feel disgruntled as some(all) of their tools are ineffective.

[/ QUOTE ]


Obviously disgruntled, modding is serious business after all.

Re: Bans
 

please send me a pm about this: examples. you can post it here as well. the pm is for my attention.

Re: Bans
 

Mat,

I was not really speaking for myself (I feel warnings usually work, the PM I sent you last week was more out of seer frustration). I was more commenting on what I think other mods feel and why they are ban happy.

Re: Bans
 

I am not banhappy and I do not enjoy bans or get some sick satisfaction out of it. That being said, when I was bbv4l/bbv mod combined I probably tempbanned more people in one day than an average mod does in a week. Back when it was just me in bbv4l it was sometimes 20-30 a day (I am not exaggerating). It's a necessity of the job and it's really our only firm hold over problem posters.

Re: Bans
 

I'm not seeking to criticise mods of any busy forum for banning - I remember how hectic oot used to be when astro was away - but I feel the use of clearly demarked progressively longer banning for repeaters is an underused approach.

1st dumb - 1 day
2nd dumb - 2 days
3rd dumb - 3 days


sort of thing.


I appreciate this would only really work against those attached to their username, but I think it'd be very effective against those.


my 2c

Re: Bans
 

[ QUOTE ]
it's really our only firm hold over problem posters.

[/ QUOTE ]

My position is they don't accomplish much or give us control over anything.

Re: Bans
 

You are going to have a tough time taking on a bear with a knife, but it's a helluva lot better than using your bare hands.

Talking to posters just does not work on a macro-scale without some kind of threat that a mod can actually do something. That may be fine for the strat forums, but BBV4l probably has 80 regular posters...OOT maybe 150. There is just no way. We're not guidance counselors. This is coming from a mod who has a lot of personal relationships with people in his former forum(bbv4l) and has tried to lead by example. If anything I think we are being too soft on regular posters as it is.

And making a standardized system is going to take away autonomy from mods to run their forums the way we want to run them. Dids is going to run his forum much differently than Nick B., and neither is better or worse. Fitting all forums in a cookie-cutter mold point system is not really ideal. It might work for the big obvious stuff like spamming and profanity filter use, but that's about all I can see.

I do like the idea of not letting certain people start threads though.

Re: Bans
 

That's why the points should be all custom. There is already is a degree of cross forum moderation that goes on. If you see a guy with four note entries from OOT and NVG mods you're likely going to be a little tougher on him.

The points just quantify that in an organized way that also sets a clear limit for the user when they're not going to have many excuses to come to admins with.

[ QUOTE ]
without some kind of threat that a mod can actually do something.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never suggested otherwise. I'm almost entirely talking about the overuse of temp bans as a method. It doesn't really work most of the time regardless of whatever other problems I have with them, and using other available options seems better. Soon we'll have more of those.

Re: Bans
 

Ryan's right inasmuch as bans don't do anything to stop people like The Accountant from spamming us.

I do think that they've got through to a few of the folks in BBV4L who want to be part of the community, but idiocy or immaturity requires them to be hit on a head a few times before they get it. Withouth a USB taser device, I think that's the best we can hope for.

I typically do a 2 day ban for a first offense, or slightly less if it's something small. Then I'll progress to a 5-7, then 14, the gonesville.

The thing is that typically on that 5-7, people just start making new accounts, and then everything gets banned.

The only possible way to really make a ban mean something is to require manual approval of new accounts, but given the volume, I'm not sure that's viable at all.

I think we're pretty much doing the best we can.

The biggest change I'd make is just to make sure that when we're banning people in the name of rehabilitation, that we take the time to explain why we're banning people in a more productive way.

Re: Bans
 

That caused me to nod several times, so I doubt we're that far off.

[ QUOTE ]
I typically do a 2 day ban for a first offense, or slightly less if it's something small. Then I'll progress to a 5-7, then 14, the gonesville.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think maybe that's one too many before permanent. Overall though I do like using escalation if I'm going to be temp banning like that. When I was just modding politics or BBV as an admin it would be warning or 3 days --> 5-7 days --> permanent.

What I really like about moderation in the new software is that all of you will finally have quick information and more tools, including the ability to nuke newly created accounts. It does show through right now that we can't do enough to prevent people from posting here. Once they find out things have changed they're going to pay more attention to what mods say and any infractions.

You'll always be within a few clicks of being able to run a deeper ip check than even I can from the panel in UBB. Spam will be severely reduced through the nuke button and hopefully the spambuster modification. Additionally, our ability to tweak permissions and more easily use different types of usergroups presents a whole other set of choices.

Maybe the thought I really want to put out there is that I know it's easy to get into a routine with how you deal with posters. Every once in a while, no matter how good things are, stepping back to evaluate isn't the worst idea. I've been frustrated in this thread because it became about what I think people are doing wrong rather than discussing alternatives. That's partly my fault.

Re: Bans
 

i think most people use the escalating concept, i know i do.

Re: Bans
 

Based on notifications everyone is all over the place with how they use temp bans. I can't even tell you who they are or what for without going back and digging through several thousand PMs, but it does seem to come up often enough that somone will get banned 7 days for a first offense, then e-mails the site with, "What? No warning?"

It's logical to use escalation, so I assume most try for that. But it ends up not working that way often enough.

Re: Bans
 

[ QUOTE ]
i think most people use the escalating concept, i know i do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Bans
 

Just to clarify... I don't think escalation of temp bans works very well at this point either.

Re: Bans
 

[ QUOTE ]
the PM I sent you last week was more out of seer frustration

[/ QUOTE ]
You've been playing werewolf?

Re: Bans
 

ryan,

if you don't think things are working, perhaps you have some clues for us as to what you think will work better? i'm medium not understanding what options there are for us outside of temp and perma bans. i'm chill with the idea that we should just get rid of the moderation system entirely, if that's what you're getting at.

Re: Bans
 

I've written on and on about my few ideas and have given more than clues. Repeating myself won't further the discussion. Like I mentioned in the OP, I'm looking for ideas from others if they have them.