Recent Banning

[3rdI]

I do not believe that ChrisW should have been banned. He is a solid individual who at times might go a little too far to prove his point but I have seen far, far, far worse in my many years and travels on the interwebz. I hope at some point a reconciliation can be made as Chris brought an interesting perspective to this forum.

@Mark (Hobbit) - I have a great deal of respect for you and I think you are a quality individual. I know you are forced to make difficult decisions and I have been in your position many times. I wish I could somehow give you access to my experience online as maybe it would change your perspective on what you consider to be disruptive behavior.

Peace to Chris.

Respect to Mark.

[Sparrow]

I actually don't think ChrisW is all that solid an individual but I likewise appreciate personalities that grate on mine and think Hobbit should reconsider... though Chris was obviously making for a high noon style showdown... lame as it was.


Moderate, but only in moderation.



It appears Chris was but one post away from 3,000... that's one strike per thousand posts. He can't be all that bad a fellow with a ratio like that.

[Evil Agent]

3rdI, you're a relatively new member, but ChrisW has been here for ten years, and there is a long history there. We don't know the whole story, but it definitely goes beyond the recent strike. Still, I do hate to see him banned for commenting in the thread I created, a thread which I'd suggested several times should have been closed.

EDIT: Maybe there should be some sort of policy similar to safe-driver policies (e.g. after 10 years of safe driving where I live, you get special considerations). Maybe strikes should be repealed or waived after a certain number of years? In which case, maybe ChrisW could be given another chance.

[Hobbit]

Thanks 3rdI (and others who have added whilst I was typing!). You are, of course, entitled to your opinion.

We take any action such as this very seriously, and we give members the chance to redeem themselves through the three Strikes rule.

On this occasion, as usual, decision was made with the consultation of other staff. It can be a cumulation of such things or a single major event that leads to such things.

On this occasion, there was more to it than just the last post; but as ChrisW is not here, I don't think it's right to discuss these matters without his presence.

Mark

[Sparrow]

Thanks 3rdI (and others who have added whilst I was typing!). You are, of course, entitled to your opinion.

We take any action such as this very seriously, and we give members the chance to redeem themselves through the three Strikes rule.

On this occasion, as usual, decision was made with the consultation of other staff. It can be a cumulation of such things or a single major event that leads to such things.

On this occasion, there was more to it than just the last post; but as ChrisW is not here, I don't think it's right to discuss these matters without his presence.

Mark

Since I've still got two strikes left, perhaps I can be a donor and give one strike to ChrisW... sort of like giving a healthy liver to a raging alcoholic.

[Hobbit]

LOL. Not sure that'll work, Sparrow, but the offer's appreciated.

It is always sad when we do these things and in this case with a long-serving member... it's harder.

But I am also aware of the counter-argument that long serving members should know what is acceptable/not acceptable more and how to approach these matters.

Often a no-win situation.

But I will assure you that we don't do these things just because I/we feel like it.

Mark

[3rdI]

LOL. Not sure that'll work, Sparrow, but the offer's appreciated.

It is always sad when we do these things and in this case with a long-serving member... it's harder.

But I am also aware of the counter-argument that long serving members should know what is acceptable/not acceptable more and how to approach these matters.

Often a no-win situation.

But I will assure you that we don't do these things just because I/we feel like it.

Mark

I certainly can respect your position. I hope you do not take my starting this thread personally. You are a genuine person and that is the highest compliment I have to offer. Just a bummer as I have gotten to know Chris a bit and I think he is a quality individual. Dammit man the people I end up getting along with the best leave or get banned!

[Sonja Ravenscroft]

I certainly can respect your position. I hope you do not take my starting this thread personally. You are a genuine person and that is the highest compliment I have to offer. Just a bummer as I have gotten to know Chris a bit and I think he is a quality individual. Dammit man the people I end up getting along with the best leave or get banned!

I'm still here 3rdI *looks around warily*

[3rdI]

I'm still here 3rdI *looks around warily*

LOL And I am glad you are

[Erfael]

It may be worth pointing out that in over four years we've given out 20 strikes, over half of which are not due to behavior things. They're mostly for things like multiple accounts used for advertising, spamming links, things like that. As far as behavioral strikes go, there are relatively few of those. Even when we want to give behavioral strikes for something, we usually find some excuse or another to allow us to give the member the benefit of the doubt. We'd much rather try to help someone fit in appropriately than kick them out. Recent events should make that pretty clear.

[ShandaLear]

This is why I can never be given power. Not only would I not take these things in any way seriously... I would ban and shun the crap out of everybody and giggle about it.

But at least I know my limits, right?

[Evil Agent]

I would ban and shun the crap out of everybody and giggle about it.

Not just banning, but also shunning the crap out of everybody? That's cold.

[ShandaLear]

That's why it's a good thing you da bossman!

[Loerwyn]

EDIT: Maybe there should be some sort of policy similar to safe-driver policies (e.g. after 10 years of safe driving where I live, you get special considerations). Maybe strikes should be repealed or waived after a certain number of years? In which case, maybe ChrisW could be given another chance.

May I just constructively disagree? Well, sort of.

If a member is known to act disruptively, to add fuel to flame discussions and to rile up the moderators, why should they be given a fourth chance (And it's likely going to be more than four considering how this site is moderated)? If they've made no signs to change their behaviour, to act in a manner appropriate to this site, then giving another chance just seems pointless as the mods'll be running after them again in no time.

In my almost two years here, I've seen very, very, very few bannings and fewer flame wars (Although they seem to be becoming more prevalent now). The mods here are incredibly understanding and they do put up with a lot of trash that I think isn't particularly fair on them (Even considering that they're mods). SFFWorld is a bit of a strange place in terms of moderation - I know that I'd have cracked down on certain people if this was my site - and not everyone appreciates or understands that, but you don't have to be here long to see that the mods do a lot of good work.

[nquixote]

I will admit that it is a little creepy seeing a longtime member get banned and not knowing what it's for. It's a little like if I worked in a market stall in a public square, and one day I saw the Duke's men rush out of an alley, throw a bag over the head of another merchant, and drag him off to the dungeons. And I'm like, "Father, hasn't that man worked here forever?" And my father puts his hands on my shoulder and says "We live in dark times, lad." And then I go back to fantasizing about the daughter of some nobleman, or pretending to be a master swordsman, or something.

OK, maybe I've read too much fantasy.