Ban Transparency and Policies

[croman]

As this is a community forum, it is necessary to establish transparent and clear rules AND enforcement of those rules. We have rules for the fora posted here but the enforcement of those rules sometimes is not transparent.

To remedy that issues, I believe there should be a thread called "BANNED" (like snippiness). It would serve two purposes:

1. It would help to explain to the community the exact details of the ban (reason, cite to infraction post, and details of ban). Not only would that provide transparency, it would allow other users to see the exact kinds of conduct that could lead to a ban and increases overall consistency of the bans and behavior standards in the forum.

2. It would allow the community to grow in a healthier way and would allow new users to quickly understand certain transgressions upon the community rules and how the community views those.

Further, perhaps this thread would be open for those who are banned to post (with the understanding further negative posting would result in further discipline). Sometimes it is healthy for the community to see attrition. This can stifle recidivism and further promote a healthier fora.

 

[HankLloydRight]

Having run many fora myself, I have to disagree. While transparency is good, posting all the info on each and every ban like that would only invite people to argue why Peter was not banned, while Paul was, when their infractions were similar. Or argue that Mary's infraction wasn't so bad and didn't warrant a ban at all.

Banning people has to allow for some subjectivity from the site owners and mods, and over time, that's not a hard-and-fast line that can be easily defined.

As Justice Potter Stewart said in Jacobellis v. Ohio - Wikipedia --

. I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description [hard-core pornography]; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it

It's really not our business why someone was banned. Remember, this is a privately owned website, so there is no notion of "free speech" or any user rights. If the mods are inconsistent on their application of the their own rules, so be it.

That said, there have been a few permanent bans that left me scratching my head. But that's not my job, my website, nor my business to know more.

 

[stopcrazypp]

As this is a community forum, it is necessary to establish transparent and clear rules AND enforcement of those rules. We have rules for the fora posted here but the enforcement of those rules sometimes is not transparent.

To remedy that issues, I believe there should be a thread called "BANNED" (like snippiness). It would serve two purposes:

1. It would help to explain to the community the exact details of the ban (reason, cite to infraction post, and details of ban). Not only would that provide transparency, it would allow other users to see the exact kinds of conduct that could lead to a ban and increases overall consistency of the bans and behavior standards in the forum.

2. It would allow the community to grow in a healthier way and would allow new users to quickly understand certain transgressions upon the community rules and how the community views those.

Further, perhaps this thread would be open for those who are banned to post (with the understanding further negative posting would result in further discipline). Sometimes it is healthy for the community to see attrition. This can stifle recidivism and further promote a healthier fora.

Most forums I visit disallow public discussion of moderator decisions because it makes their job just that much harder when people can second guess their decisions.

Some warnings can be public, but I don't think the ban has to be because I would presume the moderator has already discussed in PM with the person being banned and having a public discussion where third parties chime in (who wouldn't be aware of the PMs) doesn't really help.

 

[DragonRider]

Perhaps, just a locked thread that simply lists banned users.

 

[Electroman]

I read OP's post and I agreed with it, and put a 'Like'. Then I read Hank's rebuttal and I he completely changed my mind. He laid it out in a way that I agreed with him more than OP's view.

So I changed my vote. I moved my 'Like' to Hank's post

 

[ThisIsTrue]

I also run forums (not this one), and yes, this would make the already-thankless job all the harder. Sometimes egregious posts are deleted, so how are you going to judge the transgression anyway? Well, as HLWright said so well, it's none of our business: it's a private site, and we're here with the owners' indulgence. That welcome can be withdrawn at any time, for any reason, even if it's "not fair". Such is life when playing in someone else's sandbox.

 

[GLDYLX]

Cat herding is hard. And in the land of fora, largely thankless. I think TPTB here, do an excellent job of keeping this site civil, while welcoming diverse opinions...

With regard to public shaming, because that's essentially what the OP is proposing, I wonder if long-term consequences ever come to mind when these suggestions are presented.

Humans should be ever-growing and evolving. We have ALL been guilty of youthful stupidity and, in the age of the Internet, youthful transgressions can leave an indelible mark. You may say that our identities are hidden behind "handles" and avatars, but while we are anonymous TODAY, who's to say we won't be unmasked in the name of "Transparency" in the next year, next decade or at some point in the future when a job hangs in the balance? Or when our progeny delves into our history (because you KNOW they will)?

Let's not seek to make "hit" lists that only exacerbate a difficult situation, but instead, help promote growth through information sharing, kindness and/or relentless civility.

Stupidity speaks for itself, let's not aim big red arrows at it when we don't have to.

Happy Tuesday!

 

[SucreTease]

One problem I have is that some people here are shadow-banned, which entails their posts appearing for them, but to no one else—and they are never notified that they are banned, or why, or what infraction they have committed, or what they should do to rectify what was deemed as unacceptable behavior. They are never notified that they have been banned. They only discover this upon logging out and no longer seeing their own posts appear in the thread. They cannot start a PM, nor anyone with them. I believe that if someone is banned, they should be told so and why—it should be clear to them what corrective behavior is necessary.

 

[croman]

I understand the responses in this thread. They are totally reasonable. Clearly this site and it's ownership are free to make or decide whatever they feel is appropriate. I understand moderating fora is a thankless task for mostly volunteers.

However I do believe the current system could be improved with regard to bans. I also believe transparency will make future moderating easier.

I don't have all the answers but I do think that the current ban policies are not healthy and there could be a better solution so I'd prefer the discussion center on that if possible.

 

[croman]

Most forums I visit disallow public discussion of moderator decisions because it makes their job just that much harder when people can second guess their decisions.

Some warnings can be public, but I don't think the ban has to be because I would presume the moderator has already discussed in PM with the person being banned and having a public discussion where third parties chime in (who wouldn't be aware of the PMs) doesn't really help.

I think your presumption isn't matching reality. I think a public discussion could be very fruitful. It could also be counterproductive but I think we could set up parameters to induce more helpful discussions and perhaps reformation rather than refusal.

This all comes down to what we want to gain by punishment and what kind of transparency there will be about that punishment.

 

[ohmman]

I've always felt this was one of the more open forums when it comes to moderation. I admit to not frequenting a lot of forums, but the ones I've visited have almost always had a "no moderation discussion" policy, and they deleted posts instead of moving them to a spot where they could be reviewed by the membership (snippiness, Politics Quarantine, chit-chat, etc.)

As a volunteer moderator, I can say that actions or the lack of actions almost always upset one or more parties anyway. There's no such thing as pleasing everyone. Rest assured that we do discuss our actions among each other and ask for feedback on whether we were acting appropriately. We'll also fallible but are open to learning from our mistakes.

 

[NigelM]

Invariably true -> 50% of the spectators disagree with the umpire/referee on any given decision.

Being a Mod is a largely thankless task anyway, trust them and let them do their job even if you don't always agree.