Should checkers be banned?
-
- Lily Was Here
- Posts: 823
- Joined: 26 Apr 2006 09:56 pm
- Contact:
Should checkers be banned?
Please read the discussion in this thread before making a decision:
viewtopic.php?t=6831
The only posts on this thread should be stating how long it would last for, if the probation or open-ended banning options are chosen. All other discussion should go on the other thread; if it's here, the posts will simply be deleted.
A clear majority will be required for any decision, not simply 50% +1 vote. Voting will remain open indefinitely for the moment.
viewtopic.php?t=6831
The only posts on this thread should be stating how long it would last for, if the probation or open-ended banning options are chosen. All other discussion should go on the other thread; if it's here, the posts will simply be deleted.
A clear majority will be required for any decision, not simply 50% +1 vote. Voting will remain open indefinitely for the moment.
I chose the probation option. I do want a permanent probation, though. A couple months doesn't cut it.
I know most people want a ban, but for me, it isn't the solution. First, the IP Ban is unthinkable, due to the fact we have Adi on the same IP, but also because of sockpuppetry.
I know than a permanent probation will cause trouble to our benevolent moderators, but I do believe it's the safest solution at the moment.
I know most people want a ban, but for me, it isn't the solution. First, the IP Ban is unthinkable, due to the fact we have Adi on the same IP, but also because of sockpuppetry.
I know than a permanent probation will cause trouble to our benevolent moderators, but I do believe it's the safest solution at the moment.
-
- Posts: 1716
- Joined: 28 Jan 2006 10:38 am
- Human Avatar: 271433
- Location: Tennessee or Georgia, take your pick
- Contact:
I've ignored (or attempted to ignore)a few users from time to time because they're irritating to me personally. Unfortunately, checkers is one.
I voted for a different length of time, perhaps three weeks and then a probationary period where his behavior will be more heavily weighed. I basically "fourth" the above opinions.
I agree an IP ban would be unfair to Adi, who has become pretty nice to have around, for the most part. Maybe NOT having checkers around, to put a different spin on it, may give Adi a "break" too (I know I would be all wrung about if my sister were to post in a forum I frequent, especially if arguments erupt on notable occasion, as we are prone to argue even though we are well into adulthood).
I voted for a different length of time, perhaps three weeks and then a probationary period where his behavior will be more heavily weighed. I basically "fourth" the above opinions.
I agree an IP ban would be unfair to Adi, who has become pretty nice to have around, for the most part. Maybe NOT having checkers around, to put a different spin on it, may give Adi a "break" too (I know I would be all wrung about if my sister were to post in a forum I frequent, especially if arguments erupt on notable occasion, as we are prone to argue even though we are well into adulthood).
-
- Posts: 1062
- Joined: 26 Jan 2006 12:24 pm
- Gender: Female
- Location: Wishing for blog comments
- Contact:
"For a specified length of time". I think a couple of weeks' suspension may be all that is needed here. Make sure he is told kindly, if certainly, why this is happening, and emphasise that we have no dislike towards him as a person.
IP banning would be unfair on Adi_Gallia and could be got around fairly easily. So, not the best move.
I don't like the idea of alienating anyone from our community, even for a couple of weeks, but I think in this one case, for this ONE time, it might help as long as we handle it right.
Checkers, if you are reading this: this is nothing personal. I do hope you can stay and become a well-loved NCer just as many others have. That's been the aim I've had in mind when posting this.
Edit: If possible, can we allow him back in time for WW14? He seems very excited about it, and it would be a shame.
IP banning would be unfair on Adi_Gallia and could be got around fairly easily. So, not the best move.
I don't like the idea of alienating anyone from our community, even for a couple of weeks, but I think in this one case, for this ONE time, it might help as long as we handle it right.
Checkers, if you are reading this: this is nothing personal. I do hope you can stay and become a well-loved NCer just as many others have. That's been the aim I've had in mind when posting this.
Edit: If possible, can we allow him back in time for WW14? He seems very excited about it, and it would be a shame.
-
- Lily Was Here
- Posts: 823
- Joined: 26 Apr 2006 09:56 pm
- Contact:
I agree with Spivsy that he can't be allowed to play Werewolf while there is a general consensus in favour of a ban. For a start, there is no way I am banning him for a single week, to enable him to play; that's not a punishment. He's either banned properly or not banned at all.
An IP ban is out of the question, and I've already said that on another thread. There are other methods of banning a person, anyway. In the past, the IP ban has almost never been used because it's got far too many loopholes.
An IP ban is out of the question, and I've already said that on another thread. There are other methods of banning a person, anyway. In the past, the IP ban has almost never been used because it's got far too many loopholes.
I, too, echo those above me with a lesser ban than 6 weeks. If WW is something he is looking forward to, and one week will cover his ability to enter in that, I think a 3-4 week ban would be sufficient. Perhaps as a secondary thing to this is to just ban his user, but if he is found frequenting NC despite the punishment laid out, then the more severe punishment (of 2-3 months or permanent) be set in place.
-
- Lily Was Here
- Posts: 823
- Joined: 26 Apr 2006 09:56 pm
- Contact:
Er, that's what we're going to be doing if we ban him. It's the standard way to ban someone on phpBB without going the route of IP bans. I don't think relying on the honour system of just making him not post is going to work, and that's the only other option.Perhaps as a secondary thing to this is to just ban his user
I would also like to say that I am personally against a three or four week ban because I won't be here in four weeks' time (or five, for that matter) and it seems a little impractical to schedule a ban expiring when I know I won't be here at all. I should have said that that was why I didn't include them in the poll: because I can't enforce them.
-
- Lily Was Here
- Posts: 823
- Joined: 26 Apr 2006 09:56 pm
- Contact:
Right. I've just added it up and there's a 96% majority in favour of a ban. This means that I will be banning checkers.
Currently, I plan to ban him for two months, because:
a) two months is the single most popular option
b) 2/3 of people support a ban of two months or longer
b) if I weight it so that each vote also includes a weaker vote in favour of the option one higher and one lower (since there's only a month, max, in it) it's still the most popular.
You now have a day to change my mind as to the length of the ban, if necessary.
Currently, I plan to ban him for two months, because:
a) two months is the single most popular option
b) 2/3 of people support a ban of two months or longer
b) if I weight it so that each vote also includes a weaker vote in favour of the option one higher and one lower (since there's only a month, max, in it) it's still the most popular.
You now have a day to change my mind as to the length of the ban, if necessary.
-
- Lily Was Here
- Posts: 823
- Joined: 26 Apr 2006 09:56 pm
- Contact:
A vote followed by a decision within 3 days? That was all very quick, some of us only log in once or twice a week and this whole banning idea seems to have been discussed and decided upon in a very short period of time.
Then again, I'll admit, the people that log in less tend to get involved in these issues less and it probably wouldn't have changed the outcome anyway...
Then again, I'll admit, the people that log in less tend to get involved in these issues less and it probably wouldn't have changed the outcome anyway...
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests