Poll: Process for banning - Dedicated threads for each ban?

Poll: Process for banning - Dedicated threads for each ban?
Should each ban require a dedicated thread and that thread be linked in other sections of the forum to make users aware of it?

  • Yes
  • No

0 voters

How many days should a poll for banning a poster at least be open?

[Clarification: The question is intended to be independent of the poll being in a dedicated thread or for example in the problems posters discussion thread.]

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 10
  • 14

0 voters

Should a mod be able to contain the poster in question to threads where the ban is discussed and temp ban them if they break containment?

  • Yes
  • No

0 voters

1 Like

I made this a banner topic so everyone will see it at the top of the page until they dismiss it. Also added link in first line so it shows up at the top of the banner

3 Likes

I’m voting no and yes, but I feel like some people will think that even voting on the second question presupposes a yes vote on the first. Allowing dedicated threads is not the same as requiring them.

I guess I don’t understand this one. A mod is allowed to do this without consultation? No way, if that’s what it means.

1 Like

Yes, the question is if a mod can unilaterally contain a poster during the time he ban poll is open.

That seems outrageous. Why would anyone (all of you) want that?

I’ll clarify. The question is intended to be independent of the poll being in a dedicated thread or for example in the problems posters discussion thread.

Because one trusts the mods and if anyone disagrees with the mod they can ask the community to overturn the decision or de-mod.

2 Likes

I don’t think there necessarily needs to be a separate thread for each ban, but using a forum announcement (like the one used for this thread) would be a good idea to let people know when a banning vote is in progress.

3 Likes

I voted yes for that one to cover the case where a troll can see he’s about to be banned and runs amok in multiple threads.

Yeah. I think it should be less of a big deal for a mod to take action and have their action overturned.

1 Like

The standard to remove posters from Unstuck is starting to sound higher than the standard for serving legal notice via multiple newspapers

7 Likes

I imagine that mods discuss things among themselves, at least on occasion. So perhaps “unilaterally” is not the correct word. Of course, mods are generally aware of community opinions before they take any action.

In any event, it seems like we are asking ourselves where to draw the line for mod action permissible without a community poll. My view, seemingly shared by most, is that temp-bans and containment should be mod-allowed but perma-ban should require a community vote.

7 Likes

Should point out that there are bound to be scenarios where a snap ban is preferable to a 24-hour committee period if a Trump fan is going on a mad hate posting spree or similar. But overall I like the idea of community voting on perma decisions and I trust the current and future mods to do all other mod stuff.

Give Wookie the keys. Rest of us can relax.

3 Likes

But what if a non-troll changes his ways and makes solid posts in other threads demonstrating this. (My vote would differ based on 1 vs, say, 10 day probation.)

The containment isn’t mandatory. Let’s trust that the mods don’t do it for no reason or let’s get better mods.

We are always reliant on mods being sensible. They could run around banning people now if they wanted, but choose not to.

1 Like

I’ve suggested this before but i dont see why we cant have a group of 3-5 mods that make these decisions by a committee vote. And just leave it up to their best judgment. If people disagree they can start a vote or take their ball and go home.

I am comfortable letting the mods make banning decisions - generally against banning though.

Starting banning threads seems like a bad look for the site. Why dont we do it like literally every message board and subreddit/fb page are already doing it? This is a solved problem guys.

You would think so but the first time a mod temp banned someone a bunch of people quit the site. The mods as cops model doesn’t go over well here

In other words, UPers seem to prefer a direct democracy model of moderation over top down, which reflects the more general political beliefs here