Constructive Suggestions regarding the revised RPF Guidelines

[Art Andrews]

Wanted to go ahead and make a thread for any CONSTRUCTIVE suggestions regarding the revised RPF Guidelines so we don't end up with 500 different threads.

Let me remind you that we are not interesting in public discussion/debate of actions taken by the staff (present or past) and if you are just looking to vent/complain, this is not the place (although you are welcome to PM us.

While we feel these revisions to the Member Guidelines are a step in the right direction, we are also sure they aren't the last revisions that will ever be made/needed and we are always interested in hearing your thoughts on ways in which we can continue to improve the community.

 

[Darkknight0667]

Okay, I'll start things by bringing over a subject from the other thread (just to keep everything in one, handy place from which the staff can refer): Can you please change the current stance on self-bans being permanent? As was discussed, members who left voluntarily, for whatever reason, should be allowed to return and have their memberships reinstated. There is no good reason why they should be kept out (beyond the old reason of "we can't be bothered"). Most are/were just disgruntled about something and maybe their sense of gruntlement (like my new word?) has changed and they want to come back.

 

[Laffo]

Okay, I'll start things by bringing over a subject from the other thread (just to keep everything in one, handy place from which the staff can refer): Can you please change the current stance on self-bans being permanent? As was discussed, members who left voluntarily, for whatever reason, should be allowed to return and have their memberships reinstated. There is no good reason why they should be kept out (beyond the old reason of "we can't be bothered"). Most are/were just disgruntled about something and maybe their sense of gruntlement (like my new word?) has changed and they want to come back.

Why ask to be banned then? Why not just stop logging in? Erase the Bookmark. If disgruntled, have the fortitude not to visit the site, until your gruntlement returns. A Ban should be a Ban...
Whether it's punitive or self imposed.
Laffo.

 

[exoray]

Short and sweet make a move away from policing the forum and move more towards passively moderating the forum...

It's a whole complex and total revision to the way this forum has been and is still being run, a total reboot in essence...

Why ask to be banned then? Why not just stop logging in?

Probably because they don't want to be tempted or coaxed by the members to return and engage at that time... Most of the ones I have seen fight were engage in an argument that neither side would drop, thus the only way to really diffuse it was for one side to remove themselves totally...

Sad thing about the bans on this site is that probably half of them were (and/or are) personal conflicts with the staff or conflicts with staff friendly members... They were not banned for screwing someone over, illegal practices or stealing money but rather personal reasons... Yet they get the same lifetime treatment... But that all comes back to passive moderation vs policing...

 

[Laffo]

Probably because they don't want to be tempted or coaxed by the members to return and engage at that time...

It's called self control.
Ban means Ban. Period.
If you cannot control your own visitation of the site, for whatever reason, then maybe there should be a "Vacation," " I need a Nap," or "Crankypants" option that's reversible.

The punitive nature of a Ban should not be compromised because someone makes a hasty, emotional decision and asks to be banned. The consequence of that action is that it is irreversible - that punishment/action is very clear. It is no secret that a ban is forever. I doubt there's been a case yet, where the Member asking for a self ban, was not told that by the Mods, before the ban took effect, that it was an irreversible decision.
If that's not been the case - then I'm surprised.
Laffo.

P.S. I've seen little evidence of this: "Sad thing about the bans on this site is that probably half of them were (and/or are) personal conflicts with the staff or conflicts with staff friendly members." Looking through the banned members list I see the majority of bans as a result of bad business or theft. The next highest ban would be repeated behavioral problems. I have yet to see a "Staff VS. Members Banning Conspiracy."

 

[exoray]

It's called self control.

That would be a generic counter argument... If it was always that easy 99% of all conflicts worldwide would end peacefully, but obviously it's not human nature as history and every day proves...

 

[Laffo]

That would be a generic counter argument... If it was always that easy 99% of all conflicts worldwide would end peacefully, but obviously it's not human nature as history and every day proves...

This isn't a Worldwide Conflict. Nice dramatics.

This is whether you keep yourself from logging into a forum - or not. That is an exercise in Self Control. Contrary to what you state is a generic argument, Self Control is a solution to someone banning themselves. Let's not bait the discussion off track.
Laffo.

 

[exoray]

This isn't a Worldwide Conflict. Nice dramatics

Nothing about dramatics, the truth...

But, I will asked you do you have enough 'self control' to never discuss this topic again? It's that simple right?

 

[Laffo]

Nothing about dramatics, the truth...

But, I will asked you do you have enough 'self control' to never discuss this topic again? It's that simple right?

I will exercise the self control not point out the flaws in your logic.
Laffo.

 

[Gilmortar]

Can you please change the current stance on self-bans being permanent? As was discussed, members who left voluntarily, for whatever reason, should be allowed to return and have their memberships reinstated. There is no good reason why they should be kept out

Why ask to be banned then? Why not just stop logging in? Erase the Bookmark. If disgruntled, have the fortitude not to visit the site, until your gruntlement returns. A Ban should be a Ban...
Whether it's punitive or self imposed.
Laffo.

Well, you don't have to tell me.
Most request bans are bans of necessity rather than desire.
But the great ones, TE, Chingon, AceVader...
...they did it because it excited them

 

[exoray]

I will exercise the self control not point out the flaws in your logic.
Laffo.

But you failed to exercise the self control not to reply when coaxed, the same problem many of the members of 'self imposed bans' might have encountered...

 

[Art Andrews]

Sad thing about the bans on this site is that probably half of them were (and/or are) personal conflicts with the staff or conflicts with staff friendly members... They were not banned for screwing someone over, illegal practices or stealing money but rather personal reasons... Yet they get the same lifetime treatment... But that all comes back to passive moderation vs policing...

While you are welcome to believe whatever you would like in these matters, the truth is that he vast majority of those who have banned were banned due to misconduct related to selling. Now, the most VOCAL of those who have been banned certainly like to purport it as personal bias, but as we say in the new Guidelines and as I have said here already, we will not discuss/debate the actions taken by the staff (past or present) nor will we allow the public discussion/debate of actions taken by the staff (past or present). I am sure those who care to do such things know venues that welcome such topics so there is little need in rehashing them here. Further commentary on the actions of previous staff will be removed.

 

[Darkknight0667]

WOW! I didn't mean to start a whole thing here. In the other thread, Art said that the subject of reinstating self-banned folks might be taken up at some time in the future. That's good enough for me right now. I only brought it back up over here to have all the "Constructive Suggestions" in one spot so that the staff could find them easier when they go looking for stuff to fix.

Laffo - haven't you ever been warned about something (maybe about going out with that trampy chick in 5th period English?) but decided to do it anyway? Then, some months/years later regretted it (maybe after a certain test came back from the doctor regarding a certain infection, or possibly a paternity test) and you wished that you could undo what you did? We're not talking about scammers or major trouble makers here. They were just pissed about something and figured they'd never want to come back. Later, they changed their mind and wanted to resume old friendships in the hobby. They hadn't done anything wrong, so why shouldn't they be allowed back? Why not give them a second chance?

 

[Too Much Garlic]

They may wish to undo things, but it's not gonna happen - they'll still be ill or having a baby. Same goes for self-bans, imo. It was their choice, deal with it and stay gone.

 

[Art Andrews]

Laffo - haven't you ever been warned about something (maybe about going out with that trampy chick in 5th period English?) but decided to do it anyway? Then, some months/years later regretted it (maybe after a certain test came back from the doctor regarding a certain infection, or possibly a paternity test) and you wished that you could undo what you did?

I am not entirely sure how this applies to the situation and hand, but that was funny! :lol

Dear self-banned members.. congrats... you have the clap...

 

[Laffo]

Laffo - haven't you ever been warned about something (maybe about going out with that trampy chick in 5th period English?) but decided to do it anyway? Then, some months/years later regretted it (maybe after a certain test came back from the doctor regarding a certain infection, or possibly a paternity test) and you wished that you could undo what you did?

Firstly, we aren't in 5th Grade. Secondly, I understand both your and Exoray's positions without needing these overly grandiose parables about "Self Banning." Again, your ability to control logging on to this board or not, is not, and will not be comparable to World Politics or Unplanned Pregnancy. It won't. The inability to control snap decisions has consequences in Adult Life. If you requested a Ban, then it's permanent. When has this not been crystal clear?

Refer to post #5. That's why I suggested there be a reversible "Time Out" (or whatever the hell you want to call it) function, that:
A. Allows someone to pitch a fit and demand to "Be Banned" yet is able to be revisited and rejoin the Forum at a later time - BECAUSE IT'S NOT A BAN. Call it GULAG and it's at least 12 months long and requires an entirely new registration process, with Staff review.
B. Keeps the punitive teeth of a Staff generated BAN in place. If BAN type #1 has different consequences than BAN type #2 - then they are not the same thing. Either a Ban is irreversible or it's not - it's that easy.

If this is such a huge problem, then create a "User Ban / Time Out/. GULAG" with it's own set of rules and regulations, time frames, reactivation procedures - blah, blah, blah.
This isn't complicated semantics, philosophy, ethics or even a grey area of the CoC (or whatever it's being called now). A Ban was a Ban was a Ban, and they are irreversible as it is written.
Laffo.

 

[knightoftheroc]

Having recently become a moderator on another forum, still rather new, I certainly hope this issue does not come up for me to deal with. However, people being people, I'm sure it probably will in time.

If folks who sign up actually READ the TOS, like they SAY they have when they agree to it, then they know that a ban is forever and ever, amen. And they've AGREED to that condition. Asking to be banned makes no sense to me, personally, but I can accept that it happens- fine.

Asking to be banned is asking to be permanently banned- plain and simple. If someone can't exercise the restraint needed to not click a bookmark link, maybe they NEED a ban- but it's their decision to do that, and they need to learn to live with the consequences of those decisions- like adults do.

 

[Laffo]

Having recently become a moderator on another forum, still rather new, I certainly hope this issue does not come up for me to deal with. However, people being people, I'm sure it probably will in time.

If folks who sign up actually READ the TOS, like they SAY they have when they agree to it, then they know that a ban is forever and ever, amen. And they've AGREED to that condition. Asking to be banned makes no sense to me, personally, but I can accept that it happens- fine.

Asking to be banned is asking to be permanently banned- plain and simple. If someone can't exercise the restraint needed to not click a bookmark link, maybe they NEED a ban- but it's their decision to do that, and they need to learn to live with the consequences of those decisions- like adults do.

What he said.
Laffo.

 

[Qui-Gonzalez]

I'm curious as to the crusade to unban members who have asked for it, in one way or the other. Why do you people care? The ones who were NOT banned for bad selling practices were banned because they were trolls. Even some of the self banned people went off like crybabies over something they did not like. "Screw you guys, I'm taking my ball and going home!" Do you really want people like that here?

Sorry Exo, I can usually agree with some of your posts, but not this one. It is exactly like Laffo said: Have some self control. There are some forums I am a member of I just step back from for a time. You should have the stones to just back away and also have them to live with your decision. "I wanna come back!" Well, you were warned that it would be forever. You shant be missed.

 

[JoeR]

I am pleased to see that the infraction points will expire after 12 months, that appears to be a lot fairer. :thumbsup

Joe