a second protest against checkers' behaviour

[bonecrivain]

I am perfectly fine with a fixed-term ban. I greatly dislike the idea of a probationary period, at least as the initial punishment. Checkers's latest post in this thread shows the most contrition I've seen from him in a while, but it's also due to the threat of heavy punishment hanging over his head, I think. Although my gut feeling at the beginning of this thread was that we should permanently ban him, I've softened a bit. I don't like giving up on anyone, and that's what a permanent ban is.

I vote for a two month ban. Three months seems a bit long; once you get to that level, you might as well start thinking more seriously about a permanent ban. After the two month ban, I would like extremely strict probationary terms. If a third topic like this has to be made about checkers, I vote that his ban then becomes permanent.

I think the mods need checkers to have a temporary ban as much as checkers does. At this point, we're going to be much more touchy when he posts, if he's allowed to continue, even under probation. I'd prefer to have a cooling off period for everyone involved, then we can see what happens.

[Bacon]

This was from the first "checkers' behavior" post:

Ok then turn over a new leaf, if it gets bad again then ban this account.

Oh not making excuses, but I found out something really bad a few days ago so I might lash out randomly, personal family problems adi_gallia knows about them I dunno if I should say them though.

He told us we could ban him if he got out of hand. It's from his mouth!

[chickvw]

My opinion does not have enough voice to matter, but I for one am a NCer that quit for reasons other than checkers. Yes, he doesn't fit a particular "mold" set out, but many of us don't. You can learn a little toleration or ignorance when necessary. But knowing his personality type, I feel he has only been further baited into his current predicament.

I have frequented these forums for a while now, though I'm no die-hard long-termer or a regular. Part of the reason I'm so quiet and frequent so little is because I'm constantly thinking, "Is it really worth posting what I think and feel? I know I'll only be snapped at or belittled, etc." .. And thus I don't. I have gathered that some other folks that have tried joining have been deterred for similar reasons, seeing as two of my friends I directed to NC don't post, and on messenger have told me similarly.

Having once been a moderator at a friend's messageboard, I have participated in dealings with flat-out trolls and other nonsense. In instances like checkers where it seems the verbal warnings will not sway them, we always applied short-term bans as IMMEDIATE rebuke for a wrongful action. Example: One member decided to flame/lash out at another girl, breaking several fairly easy to understand rules. Therefore the offender was banned from the forums for 24 hours. That is a small enough span to make it smart if they planned on spending time on the forum, but not long enough for bitterness to fester at such a harsh punishment for a single offence. However, since this hasn't been done thus far, I am at a lost what to suggest other than I do not think a semi-long-term ban will accomplish anything other than provide a short 'relief' for those slated to deal with him.

[thelonetiel]

I think everyone has done a peachy job of explaining checkers's erroneous ways, so I'll try not to be redundant.

I've been consistently irritated by checkers. This is not something I'd usually worry about, as I'm easily bothered and I'm willing to put up with it as long as no one else has a problem. But the volume of posts on this thread speaks for itself; I don't believe I'm the only person who wishes he'd vanish (in a non violent way) from the forum.

Personally, I'd support a ban, temporary or permanent. I've bitten my tongue far more often than I should have. I'm easily annoyed, yes, but if after 90% of the posts he makes I would like to make a sarcastic response or correction, I think there is a problem. As well, my habit of not posting on threads that members I dislike have taken part in means that I'm continually not posting as a silent boycott of his presence.

Actually, I think I'd be satisfied if checkers was just made to thoroughly proofread and edit his posts before submitting. I'd suggest Firefox 2.0 to start, as it has a built in spell checker that will point out errors and subtly remind him that "privs" is not a word. It has been noted that arguments have erupted over misunderstandings due to his poor punctuation, improving that would be the first step to proper acceptance into the forum.

I'd prefer a ban of course, but fixing on his grammar is something he could actually work on to improve; a ban isn't effective at teaching manners, only that what he has done isn't acceptable (with the added bonus of saving members headaches).

And if it comes down to choosing between Bon (or any other of our mods) and checkers, I'd choose the mod in a heartbeat. The increased workload he has created for them is vexing, especially when it results from his deliberate refusal of their directions.


checkers, being banned means that if you are logged into the banned account, you cannot see any of the forum. Logging out rids you of this message, but you won't be able to post.

[gidget]

I think the mods need checkers to have a temporary ban as much as checkers does. At this point, we're going to be much more touchy when he posts, if he's allowed to continue, even under probation. I'd prefer to have a cooling off period for everyone involved, then we can see what happens.

This is, I think, an excellent point. The mods need some time without having to worry about Checkers. Then, if Checkers is allowed to return after some amount of time, everyone will have a fresh start, not just Checkers.

As I said earlier, I'm not privvy to the private messages between the mods and Checkers. If the above example of a pm is typical, then I could wholeheartedly back a temporary ban followed by a probationary period.

By disrespecting and ignoring the mods, who were chosen by the majority of users here, he is disrespecting and ignoring the entire community. That is unacceptable behaviour.

[sezrin]

I honestly feel he's quite often bated, or just plain misinterpretted as people already have a fixed view on him, the examples I looked at on the first page hardly seemed that much worse than what I read from a lot of other posters, including the mods.

It's a shame really, I do hate seeing this kind of action being taken.

[Silverevilchao]

I honestly feel he's quite often bated, or just plain misinterpretted as people already have a fixed view on him, the examples I looked at on the first page hardly seemed that much worse than what I read from a lot of other posters, including the mods.

It's a shame really, I do hate seeing this kind of action being taken.

Riiiiight. So repeatedly backseat modding, essentially stealing artwork, dissing the mods in PMs and compromising the internet safety of Goldenchaos is what "a lot of other posters" do?

[daisybell]

I don't know what the mods' opinion on this is, but I don't feel it's right that we should keep discussing this while checkers isn't able to post and defend himself and his actions. The forum has made its decision, and with sufficient majority- do we need to stir this up again and keep it going?

[AngharadTy]

Daisy is right. At this point we're just talking behind his back. Topic locked. PM to discuss.