iguanamon wrote:I wish the banned member had not made it so that they had to be banned. Forever, is such a long time. I know that a leopard doesn't change it's spots, but people can change. Could "for good" be changed to mean, say a year? Then after a year they might realize the error of their ways and play nice under a "one slip and you're done" rule. Other members who have been permanently banned have come back to be valuable members. So, could the member apply to come back after a 12 month period in the "penalty box"?
We have had people reapply to return, and as you say a couple of them have returned and made many valuable contributions to the community. We don't ban people lightly, and the reason that people can get "time limited" bans such as the 7 day or month long ban is just to give people time to sit it out, maybe reflect on why they got banned and then come back and settle back in. However, banning ranges are typically 1 day, 7 days, 14 days, 1 month, or forever.
Reapplication is a painful moderation / administration task as well. Should someone be granted permission to re-apply for membership then they are typically put on a "watchlist" for 6 months or a year, which means all their posts are moderated and not allowed to be seen until approved by a moderator. This means even more work for the moderation team.
Decisions about banning people are done as a group and all aspects of offences and previous contributions are considered before any action to ban someone. However, a short ban of a couple of days or a week is normally sufficient to get someone's attention. Sometimes a person might get a temporary ban based on a single moderator's judgement, but very rarely. What would normally happen is an offence is put to the moderator group, and the person might get a one-week ban while the moderation team discuss.
I can only remember 4-5 people being banned in since the forum was started here, and most of those were for a week or 14 days. Most people just need someone to point out a problem, and they sort it out themselves. Very few people have allowed it to escalate to the point where they get banned.
Deinonysus wrote: I just think that deleting your own posts should not be bannable in general.
Depends on what you're deleting, and how much. The moderation team don't automatically ban people for deleting posts. Although full disclosure; I personally ask for this at
every moderation meeting, because post restoration is an admin task, and I don't have the time or inclination to be doing DB restores because someone decides to be an asshat. This incident has strengthened my case for automatically banning for edited posts.
Honestly, if you wanted to delete your posts, and asked the moderators or an admin, we'd probably do it for you. Easier for us to check the impact and do the deletions. Especially since our deletions can be permanent, yours can't. We could also edit other posts where the posts to be deleted have been quoted. This would get your posts deleted, keep you in good faith with the moderation team, and allow you to come and go without being banned. If you have valid reasons for post removal we'll not stand in your way, but if you just start doing mass deletions, then I'm going to assume you're being an asshat.
badger wrote:there's a wiki ?
Yes, there is even a link to it in the menu bar at the top of the forum called Wiki. There is actually a lot of good stuff over there. You should check it out.