For being a mod? Sure.
Again, I’m not worried.
Ok, if that’s the case, then let’s instead codify that there is no maximum length on a ban issued by any mod on this site. That would solve that being an open issue as well.
We are already doing this with no end in sight. With rules in place we can at some point say the community has decided and that decision is final.
1 Like
I agree with this, but if there’s no community will for it, we should instead codify that any elected mod may ban any poster for any length of time they see fit.
I believe it’s a good idea to have an automatic appeal process for lengthy bans, especially permabans. If the community approves/does not disapprove of a ban the matter should be considered settled.
I propose we put up two separate polls for vote to get an idea of where the community stands.
Poll 1. A moderator may issue any ban up to two weeks in length at their discretion. Any ban longer than two weeks (including permanent bans) needs to be approved by a community vote via a poll open for 3 days in length and having at least 60% support.
Poll 2. A moderator may issue any ban of any length, including permanent.
We should move forward with whichever rule has enough support from the community.
By the rules, that I helped make, it is too late this time. But which option of moderator ban lengths do you support?
And if neither option gets the requisite 60 percent approval?
Then we’re fucked I guess. I’m a yes voter on both FYI, because either is better than status quo.
Oh man look at that I slipped through your fingers again!
1 Like
Goofy says no, so the nomination is in progress!
It’s hard to impossible to get adequate community feedback within 3 days so I think the discretionary suspension/ban/silence length should be whatever time it takes to get community approval/disapproval.
Let’s say it takes a week to give most people a chance to vote. Going through that process to overturn a 5 day ban is a bit pointless.
Maximum ban length by a mod should either be 7 days, 14 days, or permanent. Currently it’s whatever any individual mod wants it to be, so effectively permanent. Except people will complain when it suits them. So a rule should probably exist.
Let’s get a straw poll going in here!
Maximum ban length without community approval
- 7 days
- 14 days
- Permanent
0 voters
Seems like people just view bans here as a form of punishment that they like using.
Why do you think that?
What other purpose is there to ban someone for more than a day or two but less than permanently?
Don’t love permabans in theory, but in reality some people deserve them. Churchill has been banned I think 22 times now? I dont think there is anywhere else online that gives you 23 chances to adjust your behavior.
We’ve been way too tolerant of a small minority of people who have driven a larger percentage of people off of this board permanently. I wish permanent bans weren’t necessary. It’s a thing needed on reddit or the thousand of other places with a large amount of child/teenage posters. Given that the average age here is ~40, this is ridiculous.
3 Likes
So you don’t have to ban them a 23rd time in Churchill case? If they haven’t adjusted their behavior after 22 bans, why are we allowing it to continue?
Right, either you ban them permanently or stop banning altogether. And he was just up for a perma vote so it’s pretty clear how the community feels.