banning policy

If you're having any problems with the site, please post here and a site administrator will respond.

banning policy

Postby Cece » Sat Nov 06, 2010 3:47 pm

Banning Policy
http://www.thisisms.com/ftopicp-1964.html#1964
Posted: Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:05 pm Post subject: Banning Policy
Posted by: Arron - Site Admin
Quote:
Multiple situations have arisen now where members have been accused of crossing the line in one way or another and a call has been raised to ask them to leave.

It is extremely difficult to determine in a fair fashion if one should be on the site or not. Just because someone does not agree with you does not mean they should be prevented from posting. However, if the manner in which they respond is making a large number of people uncomfortable and negatively affects the tone of the site, the offending member will unfortunately need to leave, or in forum terms, be "banned."
Effective immediately, if I [receive] more than 5 PMs from established posters (registered for over 1 month, with more than 10 posts) complaining in detail-- with examples-- about a particular member, I will put the member on notice of the complaints and ask them to provide a public response. If after posting the defense, those same complaints are upheld, the member will be banned. If no defense is provided, the member will of course be banned.

Reinstatement will be on a case-by-case basis, run through me.

Any thoughts?
Cece
Family Elder
 
Posts: 9022
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:00 pm

Advertisement

Postby Johnson » Sat Nov 06, 2010 4:19 pm

What I would like to see is an "ignore user" option - wherein one can block posters they find to be annoying. Then people can post to their hearts' content. Annoying posters eventually give up when they receive no reads, and no responses.

This forum has unfortunately become something of a circus, which is a shame.
My name is not really Johnson. MSed up since 1993
User avatar
Johnson
Family Elder
 
Posts: 979
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 4:00 pm
Location: Ucluluet, BC

Postby Cece » Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:07 pm

Lyon, you have your moments, as do we all. This was not aimed at you, unless you have that double identity. Good analogy with the houseguests. But whether we're new or old, it seems reasonable to step up if we see people setting fires in the corners.

I spent hours upon hours here in 2006, that was when I was diagnosed. I didn't post then, though, I saved them all up for 2010.

An "ignore user" option would be great but we haven't got that.

There are a few people who I believe negatively affect the tone of the site. But do they make a large number of people uncomfortable?
Cece
Family Elder
 
Posts: 9022
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:00 pm

Postby L » Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:09 pm

[quote="Cece"But do they make a large number of people uncomfortable?[/quote]

For sure. No doubt about it.
User avatar
L
Family Elder
 
Posts: 946
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 3:00 pm
Location: The United Kingdom

Postby Trish317 » Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:14 pm

Cece wrote:Lyon, you have your moments, as do we all. This was not aimed at you, unless you have that double identity. Good analogy with the houseguests. But whether we're new or old, it seems reasonable to step up if we see people setting fires in the corners.

I spent hours upon hours here in 2006, that was when I was diagnosed. I didn't post then, though, I saved them all up for 2010.

An "ignore user" option would be great but we haven't got that.

There are a few people who I believe negatively affect the tone of the site. But do they make a large number of people uncomfortable?


Yes, and totally annoyed.
User avatar
Trish317
Family Elder
 
Posts: 357
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 3:00 pm
Location: Rhode Island

Postby Lyon » Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:18 pm

L wrote: Ah yes, the good old days of MS when there was absolutely no hope except for aggressive chemotherapy.
That there is no substitute for hope but a minority singing the (as yet unproven) glory of CCSVI REALLY constitutes certain cause for hope?

If the theory of CCSVI really is so promising and if the singers are REALLY so convinced, the question always has been and remains "why are those asking questions always treated as the enemy?"

cheerleader wrote:That's why there are 30 other forums that cover a variety of other topics...personal attack removed
I'll stay, thanks!
Lyon
Family Elder
 
Posts: 6063
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:00 pm

Postby Cece » Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:28 pm

L wrote:
Cece wrote:But do they make a large number of people uncomfortable?


For sure. No doubt about it.

Trish317 wrote:Yes, and totally annoyed.

Ok, I like the direction this is going.

Is Arron still on this site or will any pm's need to be directed to one of the mods instead?

What is needed is a pm, with a list of complaints with examples, about any individual who you believe is negatively affecting the tone of the board and made you uncomfortable. Please do not send a pm unless these criteria have been meant. This is not meant as a witch hunt, but maybe a little empowerment back to any of us who have been affected by it.
Cece
Family Elder
 
Posts: 9022
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:00 pm

Postby PCakes » Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:32 pm

Cece wrote:There are a few people who I believe negatively affect the tone of the site. But do they make a large number of people uncomfortable?


Yes, without a doubt.

Johnson's idea would be best... I know not of the possibility..
User avatar
PCakes
Family Elder
 
Posts: 849
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 4:00 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Cece » Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:36 pm

PCakes wrote:
Cece wrote:There are a few people who I believe negatively affect the tone of the site. But do they make a large number of people uncomfortable?


Yes, without a doubt.

Johnson's idea would be best... I know not of the possibility..

It would be a major change, I don't know that it's feasible. I think we have to work within the rules of the board, if we're to do anything at all.
Cece
Family Elder
 
Posts: 9022
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:00 pm

Postby garyak » Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:54 pm

It's so hard not to get a bit upset at some of the negative ccsvi posts that are from repeat posters.
Their styles, when they reply, often appear to be just wanting to get us pwMS riled up. I have really aggro MS and before my procedure I often thought about how and when to kill myself. So I have a fairly short fuse for some posters.
I now have hope for my future and are in much better mental health since my procedure. I try to be tolerant but it's tough at times.
User avatar
garyak
Family Elder
 
Posts: 314
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 3:00 pm
Location: grande prairie , alberta,canada

Postby jimmylegs » Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:56 pm

my 'ignore user' button is in my head! usually i find it quite reliable :)

the rules are pretty simple: 5 well documented cases for consideration by arron.

i remember the last person (as far as i know) that was banned, that case still stands out against anything i've seen to date.

if we had such a user at TIMS today, i assure you at *least* 5 members would have done the work by now.
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 9026
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 4:00 pm

Postby jimmylegs » Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:58 pm

garyak i hear you... although my route has been different, i remember when i was doing so badly i expected to die by the end of the year.. it really sucks when life gets you like that :(
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 9026
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 4:00 pm

Postby jimmylegs » Sat Nov 06, 2010 6:09 pm

rules of the board
slightly veiled innuendo or sarcastic comments aimed at the poster as opposed to the content of the post, are not tolerated at This is MS. We of course reserve the right to ban or suspend any member who violates this rule.

anyone have comments on banning policy?
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 9026
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 4:00 pm

Postby Mathd » Sat Nov 06, 2010 7:03 pm

I dont think Banning someone is the best way.
anyway they will be capable to came back with an other name.
at this point you can ban a ip address, but it can be easy to change ip address,


And the ignore button is not the key too. The problem will be a lots of hole in a thread, and it will be as unreadable than reading junks...

I think(my 2 cents... ) that a moderator is always needed when things goes wrong like now, but a good common sence is always better

yelling that CCSVI is not real is not a good thing, but for the same reason yelling that CCSVI is the miracle we were waiting for is not better

their is studies on both side, both side are not flawless. we'll all have to wait for new (good, well built, not biased) studies to be completly sure...

anyway this is not politics, I dont want to be convinced to vote for someone... I'm old enough to think by myself,like everyone

(sorry for the quality of my english...)
User avatar
Mathd
Family Member
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 4:00 pm
Location: Gatineau, QC, CA

Postby jimmylegs » Sat Nov 06, 2010 7:23 pm

@mathd: thanks for your post, although i will say that banning has seemed effective in the past (1 single case i know about). i certainly agree it might not work 100% of the time!

the rules of the forum are clearly stated. please feel free to contribute accordingly :)
Last edited by jimmylegs on Sat Dec 11, 2010 9:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
jimmylegs
Volunteer Moderator
 
Posts: 9026
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 4:00 pm

Next

Return to Site Support

 


  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


Contact us | Terms of Service