Forums > Social Discussion > Reply to bluecats thread which currently seems to be unpostable in

Login/Join to Participate
Page: ...
onewheeldaveGOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom


Posted:
reading this-



[Old link]



and this-



[Old link]



i felt the need to make comment, but, the reply button would not work on either, so I guess they've been locked?



From the perspective of a (long-standing) member of the HOP community, i felt it was important to put forward two points-



1. why some may feel the need to talk about the banning of another long-standing member of the community, not necessarily to criticise those who made that decision, but, simply because that is what community members do when someone is exiled- they feel the need to talk about it



2. address the posted comment by a mod that, from the perspectice of a mod, any discussion of said members banning, is necessarily disrespectful to the mods



To elaborate on point 2, IMO, the discussion on the threads that have been removed or locked, did not come across as disrespectful to the mods.



To question a decision is not necessarily disrespectful.



It's true that the banning of NYC has gone largely unnoticed, till now. But, now, it has very much been noticed and, to expect this community to not talk about it, is, IMO, unrealistic.



There may be very good background reasons why it's seen as best for no discussion to take place, but, obviously, from the perspective of the community, those reasons are not known.



I know it's a difficult thing to make judgements on.



The main thing I want to say is that I find it very unpleasent when multiple threads are locked or removed, when, in my eyes, they contained nothing offensive.



I would also like the mods to examine the possibility that the pulled/stoped discussions are actually not disrespectful to HOP or the mods, but are simply members of the community discussing something which is important to them.



I'm assuming that this thread is not also going to be seen as disrespectful- it's certainly not intended as such.



If threads discussing this chain of events are going to be systematically pulled or locked, then, like many here, I'm going to be wondering whether I'm part of this community any more.



A community talks- that's the point of it.



If that talk is abusive, damaging, hurtful, then it has to be pulled- no questions about it.



But I'm concerned that what is developing here is the pulling of stuff that is not at all abusive, damaging or hurtful.



Banning someone for good reasons is one thing, but expecting the community to 'never again utter their name' is dodgy as hell smile

"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."

--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32


Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!


PyrolificBRONZE Member
Returning to a unique state of Equilibrium
3,289 posts
Location: Adelaide, South Australia


Posted:
perhaps "account suspended"?

--
Help! My personality got stuck in this signature machine and I cant get it out!


AdeSILVER Member
Are we there yet?
1,897 posts
Location: australia


Posted:
thanks Pyrolific, I'd be more comfortable with 'account suspended' smile

Rouge DragonBRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia


Posted:
Sorry to argue semantics, but I just want to put a vote in for 'account inactive' because that could equally mean that the person has left on their own accord. Account suspended still has the stigma of public humiliation that the person has been reprimanded by the mods.

I suppose the question is what actually *is* the punishment of banning?

If it's being removed from the community (which is what I see it as) then the removal on it's own should be the punishment and there shouldn't be public ridicule by having a status announcing it.

i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey

Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...


PyrolificBRONZE Member
Returning to a unique state of Equilibrium
3,289 posts
Location: Adelaide, South Australia


Posted:
but its also confusing to give the same tag for people who have voluntarily left of their own accord and asked to be removed from our DB, and people who have literally been banned? after all, this has all started because people claim that we tried to hide the fact that NYC had been banned? Its not a punishment in terms of ridicule, its to ensure theres open-ness about whats going on.

talk about mixed messages!!! this is exactly why we've got into this mess, by trying to preserve dignity and privacy *sighs*.

--
Help! My personality got stuck in this signature machine and I cant get it out!


Rouge DragonBRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia


Posted:
yeah, sorry about that. I'm not up in arms about the ban so just ignore me! ubblol

i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey

Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...


DentrassiGOLD Member
ZORT!
3,045 posts
Location: Brisbane, Australia


Posted:
i hardly thing being banned from a single internet forum exactly equates to 'public humiliation.'

im sure theres a whole range of emotions involved - but horror at ones loss of face is probably one of the lesser.

regardless - if i get fired from a job for breaking the rule - i get fired and have to deal with the consequences. im not lumped together with retirees and resignations to a 'job inactive' catagory.

"Here kitty kitty...." - Schroedinger.


YakumoSILVER Member
veteran
1,237 posts
Location: Oxfordshire, United Kingdom


Posted:
If a user leaves of their own accord they don't ask to be banned, neither does anything automatically ban you if you don't log in for literally years. A ban is specifically a barring, a banishment, a punishment.



'Account suspended' is back to heavily implying it's temporary when it might not be.



I guess a lot of this comes down to myself not seeing "banned" as meaning permanent by default, just as a statement of the users status, same as banning someone from driving.



My view perhaps is tainted by the fact all forums I've ever worked with call the act of barring a user access a "ban" both internally in mod/admin panels and externally to users, I've banned a lot of people, and a lot of sites already do all this automatically so it's a non issue there, but I think you're trying to be overly fluffy over something that is inherently not.



I think you trying to make it 'nicer' is actually not doing the banned user justice either. If banned unfairly, which seems to be your worry, it is even more important that other users (even mods) know the state of affairs truthfully.



NB. HTML/colours would be a good idea, and/or block the selected choice of words from user selectable titles, so users can't add that themselves to fake a self ban.

Blinded by Hyperlights, please donate generously grin


BirgitBRONZE Member
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)


Posted:
I had the impression from this discussion that permanent ban for people who actually were members of the community once, and not just spambots, are the very rare exception, so if there was a vote I'd support the "suspended". But as long as some tag is agreed on I'm not really that fussed, it's more important that one is introduced than exactly what it says.

"vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)

Owner of Dragosani's left half


AdeSILVER Member
Are we there yet?
1,897 posts
Location: australia


Posted:
 Written by :Yakumo


'Account suspended' is back to heavily implying it's temporary when it might not be.



But it might only be temporary - as far as I understood it, bans can and have been overturned.

 Written by

I think you're trying to be overly fluffy over something that is inherently not.



BWHAHAAAHAHAHAHA

me fluffy?

ubblol ubblol ubblol

 Written by

I think you trying to make it 'nicer' is actually not doing the banned user justice either. If banned unfairly, which seems to be your worry, it is even more important that other users (even mods) know the state of affairs truthfully.



True - I am trying to make it nicer - because HoP IS a nice place to be, it's not like other forums as has been acknowledged. Why hit people over the head with a brickbat, when there may be a nicer way to deal with it.

And my worry is not people being banned unfairly (that's not my call to make, I trust the mods to do thier job), it's how we then treat people afterwards. Do we write them off? or do we work with people and welcome them back to our community when they are ready to engage in the forum the way most of our memebers do?

PyrolificBRONZE Member
Returning to a unique state of Equilibrium
3,289 posts
Location: Adelaide, South Australia


Posted:
only spambots are permanently banned on HOP, a ban is usually temporary round these parts.



"account suspended" does more clearly indicate the meaning I think.
EDITED_BY: Pyrolific (1210805184)

--
Help! My personality got stuck in this signature machine and I cant get it out!


Fine_Rabid_DogInternet Hate Machine
10,530 posts
Location: They seek him here, they seek him there...


Posted:
 Written by :Rouge Dragon


Sorry to argue semantics, but I just want to put a vote in for 'account inactive' because that could equally mean that the person has left on their own accord. Account suspended still has the stigma of public humiliation that the person has been reprimanded by the mods.

I suppose the question is what actually *is* the punishment of banning?

If it's being removed from the community (which is what I see it as) then the removal on it's own should be the punishment and there shouldn't be public ridicule by having a status announcing it.



On every other forum on the whole internet (that's probably an exaggeration, but certainly a large proportion of forums) changes a member status to "Banned", "Banished" or whatever once a member has been banned. For one reason, it lets members know who's around and who isn't, as well as properly enforcing the rules. If you know someone's been banned for whatever reason, you're not going to do the same thing if you want to stick around.

As for public humiliation?

Its the internet. Anyone humiliated by a ban from any forum, let alone this one, needs to go outside and get some fresh air.

Besides, I'd be slapping out high fives to anyone that managed to get banned from HoP wink

The existance of flamethrowers says that someone, somewhere, at sometime said "I need to set that thing on fire, but it's too far away."


PeleBRONZE Member
the henna lady
6,193 posts
Location: WNY, USA


Posted:
Ade, you got called fluffy! ubblol Sorry, that struck me as very funny.



Pyrolific, I will support you in the "account suspended", for all the reasons stated.



FRD, it has been established many times that HoP is a very different piece of splendor on the net. On most other boards you either see tonnes of flaming or tyranical styles of moderation.

Just because all the other kids are setting each other on fire doesn't mean we...oh wait.. wink



*editted to for a fix
EDITED_BY: Pele (1210878640)

Pele
Higher, higher burning fire...making music like a choir
"Oooh look! A pub!" -exclaimed after recovering from a stupid fall
"And for the decadence of art, nothing beats a roaring fire." -TMK


Fine_Rabid_DogInternet Hate Machine
10,530 posts
Location: They seek him here, they seek him there...


Posted:
 Written by :Pele


FRD, it has been established many times that HoP is a very different piece of splendor on the net. On most other boards you either see tonnes of flaming or tyranical styles of moderation.
Just because all the other kids are setting each other on fire doesn't mean we...oh wait..;)



Oh don't get me wrong. I know this place is waaaaaaaaay different/better than every other forum on the net. That being said, it doesn't necessarily mean that all of "their" systems aren't good ideas.

The existance of flamethrowers says that someone, somewhere, at sometime said "I need to set that thing on fire, but it's too far away."


Page: ...

Similar Topics

Using the keywords [reply bluecat * currently unpostable] we found the following existing topics.

  1. Forums > Reply to bluecats thread which currently seems to be unpostable in [262 replies]

      Show more..

HOP Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest on sales, new releases and more...