just mod how you want dude theres no real rules around this that ive ever seen, my 2c
this is very wise because of prolonging rfc process would just create drama here for weeks and no one wants that I think (well, some do, but w/e)
1 Like
I, for one, am excited for Saboâs new baseball content.
3 Likes
A forum where no one is permanently banned and moderators take the âKeedâ approach.
Iâm sure only good things will happen.
2 Likes
I appreciate your concern. Obviously I think (and hope) you are wrong and this is the right decision. I didnât make it lightly and spent quite a bit of time reviewing the old threads and Saboâs posts. That said, it is obviously a risk, and I will do my best to watch and make sure I didnât choose poorly.
2 Likes
Then why not follow the process? Have a binding poll that asks a simple question like âshould Sabo stay/be bannedâ? Create a banner, keep the poll open for a week and then follow the results. We should have an idea what the threshold is (50%+1, 60%, other) beforehand though.
You deciding this unilaterally is going to do just that.
1 Like
The RFC is still open. Any poster can @spidercrab and ask him to create the poll for the wording of the question, followed by the actual vote.
Then I suggest a poll with the wording, @spidercrab :
âShould Sabo stay permanently banned?â
Letâs get this over with.
17 people voted Yes to permban Sabo in the poll in the OP, does it really matter that we donât know who voted for what? We can always use the jmakin poll to make an educated guess as to who voted in this one if itâs so important we know who participated
I wasnât decided unilaterally and no one had a problem when I unilaterally converted Saboâs ban to a silence earlier in the year. Itâs weird that we need an RFC to undo a non-RFC decision.
Sabo wasnât permanently banned when this thread was created, although I was unaware at the time that his ban had been again reverted to a silencing, so this wording wouldnât work.
Yes, because itâs not a binding poll. People might not even be aware it existed, choose not to vote or have changed their mind.
It sets a bad precedent too give validity to non-binding straw polls hidden in an obscure part of the site.
1 Like
Then change it to
âShould Sabo be a permanently banned user?â
That ship sailed quite a while ago.
Do you suggest we play calvinball going forward?
1 Like
Always had been. Stop trying to police other peopleâs posting.
What is this thread again?
I think the RFC process is already calvinball, just dragged out in slow motion, especially in cases like this where I can just click a couple of buttons on someoneâs profile and they get banished to the phantom zone for however long I please but then if people would like that action reversed we have to do this elaborate 10+ day long song and dance process of multiple votes and Official Administrator Posts etc, etc, etc.
Maybe we should just let community elected moderators moderate and complain about their decisions in About Moderation like weâve done for years.
1 Like
Because thatâs working out great for everyone.
To address your points - the initial RFC was a non-binding straw poll. Had Sabo been banned via a valid RFC, I would not have thought I had the ability to undo it without a subsequent formal RFC vote (and had no plans to get involved in this process until I learned otherwise).
Given that I (now) disagreed with the ban, I thought it better to use my discretion to undo it, rather than force their to be a formal RFC to confirm the decision. Based on the past few weeks, my reading of the room was that most people just want the fighting/banning RFCâs to be done and not take up all the oxygen, and for mods to use discretion and try to do what they think is best for the forum.
1 Like
I think itâs best for the forum to have this matter settled properly once and for all.
Iâve asked for approval of wording for a proposal in the unban everyone RFC thread that would effectively unban/unsilence Sabo if he wants that to happen and keeps him that way at least until the community approves of a process for banning people.