Fair enough. That is the proper process.
I will note that my warning was not to stop this process/discussion but the petty bickering with Keeed about completely unrelated issues.
1 Like
And for the record, Victor, my vote on this one is winnable, since I have no idea if he actually threatened you or not, but if he did threaten you and/or threatened to doxx you, then I agree he should be banned.
I disagree and don’t think that mods should be expected to wait to ban people for making threats. That’s like a totally standard TOS violation resulting in instant nuking. Do you need an RFC to ban someone posting horse porn? There’s not been a successful RFC for any current permabanning, and every permabanned member that I’m aware of wasn’t the result of some ad hoc individual RFC like what was tried with Churchill a little while ago.
1 Like
So what you’re saying is that the RFC process makes it too difficult to ban problematic posters? Excellent point!
2 Likes
@mods It’s seriously insane that this gimmick has not been banned yet. There is a community rule that is quite explicit about this. That rule should be enforced, especially when it’s being circumvented to make threats and stir up shit. But regardless of the purpose, it is extremely clear that this is a gimmick of a banned account, and it is a violation of the community rules to allow that account to post. If people want to discuss the merits of the ban or the rules in general, there are appropriate venues for that discussion, but this is a very flagrant violation of the rules and there’s absolutely no reason for it.
Ugg - I just saw that jmakin said he did not want an RFC. I feel I should honor his request on this issue given his struggles with mental issues. I deleted the RFC thread for that reason.
1 Like
He stated he didn’t want an RFC in this thread? Or a year ago when this happened?
He said it in the OP. It was referring to why he took the self-ban, but unless he’s saying his feelings on the issue have changed, I don’t think it’s right to subject him to an RFC.
No, I’m saying that moderators certainly should permaban people for egregious violations on their own authority. This is an implied and standard power of internet moderators. Guy posts horse porn, permaban him. Guy threatens to dox another poster, permaban. Bog standard internet stuff. It’s insane to argue you have to go through the 17 week KFC process to ban someone making threats or posting horse porn.
1 Like
no i want one, make it official. i wont read it
Can we get clarity on community guidelines regarding abusive pms?
If I need to read through those threads I will but hoping to hit the easy button.
If you’re concerned about his mental health, enabling his manifestly unhealthy engagement with this community is a very bad decision.
2 Likes
I agree and think mods can and should issue perma’s for stuff like that without an RFC. However, I think it people want to create an RFC to reverse the ban, that is also allowed.
I have undelete the RFC to reverse the perma.
1 Like
agree 100%
edit: well, until I read vic’s post. He raises a good point that I hadn’t considered with threats in particular.
You may likely be right, but I really don’t want to have to be involved in that type of decision. Perhaps I’m being a coward trying to hide behind the rules so I don’t have to make judgement calls here, but I really don’t want to be involved in this mess more than I have to.
to be clear I agree completely and banning me for the pm is completely valid, albeit in my opinion a bit inconsistent given the vicious pm’s my friends have received here over the years - but it is valid. the fact the pm happened on another site, meh, whatever.
the rfc process is utterly absurd. i know because i helped implement it. i just watched you guys debate for like what, multiple weeks about whether to ban churchill, who no matter where you stand on the issue, is pretty much universally agreed to be disruptive if not one of THE most disruptive posters here (i personally dont care and have no side, i think its kinda funny sometimes tbh). but no with me its snap ban with no rfc? cmon.
nuke the rfc, perma me, whatever, but please stop allowing bad faith players to abuse this awful system. anyone not wanting this rfc to be made, i’d immediately be suspicious.
The rules do not permit banned posters to create gimmick accounts.
A lot of the controversy here has been due to people complaining about mods doing “bog standard” modding.
I’ve tried in the past to explicitly come up with egregious violations that mods can permaban for.
Grunching to reply to posts that tagged me before actually digging into the OP
That is correct.
This is also correct. jmakin’s accounts were banned because he made posts saying to just permban them and not drag things out through an RFC, so I guess I should have gone through the 2 week cooldown process and blah blah blah before dropping the hammer.
1 Like
Just to clarify here, Vict0ar’s post is 100% accurate, at least for luckiest_man_alive. I heard about the 2+2 PM second hand and after Vict0ar posted some of the text I asked for a screenshot, which he provided and I posted in the moderator forum for discussion. There was unanimous agreement the account should be perm banned and at the time we had 7 or 8 moderators.
2 Likes