is permanently banning members really necessary?

Status
Not open for further replies.
ahalpert

ahalpert

Major Contributor
There have been a couple member bans recently that made me question if there isn't a way to maintain order on the forum that is less detrimental to the public good.

First, someone made a political comment on the dji blacklist thread and then called the moderator a putz after his post was removed. i thought throwing insults at the mods was a bonehead move (ie biting the hand that feeds you), but it did seem like a misunderstanding based on what else he said. it seemed like he thought his post was being axed because of its specific politics instead of a general no-politics rule. meanwhile, all his other posts that i read had been intelligent and interesting. is the community really better off without him?

And then just this week, john brawley got banned permanently for reasons unknown to me. john repeatedly violated the no-politics rule, but none of my fellow members whom I've consulted said they were offended by his rants even if they disagreed with him.

John might have been the single most educational poster on this site for me and provided me with invaluable information, including by disabusing me of some technical misconceptions I had harbored for years.

I don't know what he did to finally get banned and maybe he deserved it. But it sure seems like the forum is worse off without him and that we run the risk of losing him to a competitor. He's also working at a high level in TV drama and could be a valuable connection for anyone working in that segment of the industry.

I know that dvxuser isn't a democracy and that rules have consequences. But isn't there another way to discipline rulebreakers that wouldn't deprive the community of what they have to offer? Wouldn't it be possible to simply ban them temporarily?

To paraphrase John Donne, "If a clod be washed away by the sea, dvxuser is the less."

Our industry is full of hotheads, so unwanted casualties seem inevitable on account of an angry lapse of judgement.

In other words, if rules put in place to benefit the community instead diminish it, might they not require reform?

What do you guys think? Am I off my rocker? Did they have it coming? Are we better off without them? Or are we worse off?
 
In my opinion, JB is a great asset and resource on this forum. Like Charles (and others), who is working at a high level and comes here and freely shares knowledge, insight and great stories "on the inside", we are lucky to have them.

Like you, Abe, I do not know what may have been said that may have led to his ban, but I vote to reinstate JB(if he was permanently banned and if he would want to come back).

Hell, we've seen mods step over the line recently, too.
 
I've seen other boards give two week bans. That's usually long enough cooling their heels. But don't worry he'll most likely be back under a new account. I don't feel that sympathetic because there are a lot of people who have difficulty acting respectful on the internet.
 
Peter C. said:
I don't feel that sympathetic because there are a lot of people who have difficulty acting respectful on the internet.
Click to expand...

This is true, but I didn't think he was being a troll. And even if someone trolls me, I can always add them to my ignore list
 
A few years ago on a sports forum, I was banned from a thread about a particular American soccer player because I said he wasn't ever going to be good enough for his billionaire owned club that could afford some big time stars. That peed me off and I soon quit that site after over 40,000 posts over a decade and a half. (I lurk now and again without signing in).

And as a side note, the player whose future I questioned proved not to be good enough for the whole league and was just sold from a club in the Euro League ranked #2 to a club in the Euro League ranked #13.
 
Maybe an escalating ban.

1st time: 1-2 weeks
2nd time: 1 month
3rd time or more: 3 months (max)

If a year elapses, then count resets (e.g., 2nd time in over a year would just be 1-2 weeks)

A permanent ban is sometimes necessary. For example, I once saw a member say he wanted to kill another one.
 
I've operated several email lists over the years and overseen a couple very active message boards. I currently only run one email list, but it has 4000 members. So I've had to deal with member issues and I have empathy for the moderators here. That list, btw, is on groups.io. It's a pretty flexible platform (though it's not all like the vBulletin system dvxuser runs on).

It lets moderators place list members on moderation, one a moderator needs to approve any message the person tries to sends to the list.
Or moderators can let members read posts, but not make any of their own. That's usually a short-term thing.

Those two steps lets "problem" members still follow the list, but it requires actions by moderators to keep things running. And it usually results in back-channel discussions. It's kind of a pain all around. I try not to do that often, but sometimes it's needed.

I think I've only banned a few people. One was a spammer harvesting email addresses. A couple others made ad hominem attacks on other list members.

On thing that's helped with board-line cases (which is most), is factoring in how many positive contributions the person's made to the list. The more the person has participated in discussions —and that participation can include vigorous debate and disagreement—the more slack they get.

So I might ask them to chill, maybe quietly place them on moderation for a bit (which requires me to deal with all their posts), or whatever. And then after a cooling-off period, I take them off moderation and they can freely post to the list.

Anyway, the moderators here will figure out what's best. Good luck to them (and to John et al)
 
Honestly it seems like politics are connected to the industry to varying degrees, sometimes more extensively than others and the no-politics rule stifles relevant discussion. Is it possible that this rule contributed to the prevalence of gear over content in DVXuser discussion and the overall decline of the site? Maybe my interests have changed as my life situation has changed but I know things used to be different and I don't think I'm the only person that feels this way, somewhat.

Apologies for the (possibly off-base) rant.
 
Yes. This.

Many films are political films. A strict no politics rule would mean those films cannot be discussed.

Diversity hiring is a political subject by definition. So if the powers do not want political content they should have nixed that topic from the start. Although, ironically, a reason one would not delete the topic is fear of being seen as politically incorrect in such an act. As if it indicates you are anti-diversity.

Were it me I might use the measure of whether the poster is being political. Advocating for or against politicians or political ideology. As opposed to, say, mentioning political policy in discussion of COVID’s impact on the film and video industry.

How you gonna discuss AB-5 legislation without bringing up politics?
 
that's the thing - some "political" discussions are pretty central to the film business. maybe the rule should be don't advocate for a specific politician. or maybe the rule should just be no ad hominem attacks on other posters. personally, I find it much more objectionable when someone on twitter says, "you're stupid for saying x" instead of saying "x is a stupid thing to say" or better yet just saying "that is an incorrect thing to say". just the manners i was taught growing up i guess that you don't call someone else stupid
 
combatentropy said:
... A permanent ban is sometimes necessary. For example, I once saw a member say he wanted to kill another one.
Click to expand...
On that sports site, there was one Oklahoma based member, posting under his real name. He also wrote for a different site under the same name. And he often went into a Don Rickles mode with other posters. He was often funny but quite often stepped over the edge. Once he insulted someone from Texas, who threatened to drive to Oklahoma - neighboring states after all - and show him what's what. That was the last time the guy used his real name. He changed it to a moniker most often associated with the legendary comedian.
 
I know the forum's not a democracy, but I vote (in the invisible ballot box) to please reinstate JB (just now learned he was banned).
To reiterate, a wealth of knowledge at a high level, a valuable asset to the community.
A few warning shots across the bow would be preferable...
 
I agree with the general sentiments that JB should not be banned. I was discussing in the deleted diversity thread and disagreed with a lot of what JB was saying, I also found some of his posts offensive (what is the difference between disagreeing and finding something offensive?) However JB was not trying to offend. As a friend of mine often says "This is a free democracy. You have the right to be offended. Now poo poo Off!" (even that comment has been censored)
As others have said a ban for a period (days/weeks) is fine (with an explication) but outright ban is not.
The greater offense was deleting the thread. 99% of it was a fascinating discussion on diversity.
This brings me to another point.

There is a problem with the no politics rule. This forum is very much international yet the rules on politics are from a very narrow US view point that many will not understand. This was clear in the diversity thread on the very different culture on race, gender, sexual orientation on the opposite sides of the pond. The best way to illustrate this is to see any clips of the Graham Norton Show when they have new US celebrities on it. Note the GNS is a free to view over the air broad cast on the BBC. All be it late evening.

Please reinstate the diversity thread (less the final posts that killed it) and reinstate JB even if I think he is wrong I will fight to the death to protect his right to say it. Lets face it if starting an insurrection is not a banable offense a few posts on here certainly should not be.
 
Last edited:
Add me to the list of people who think permanent bans should be earned over time with multiple offenses.
If you are spoiling the experience for people regularly, forever begone! But if you cross the line twice or thrice a year, a slap of the hand should do the trick.

Also, add me to the people who do not necessarily agree with a lot of what JB says, but who appreciate his contributions.
 
The trouble is we only see the outcome, not what went into making it. Personally, my view with all things forums is that the moderators and admin folk are the ONLY ones who know what happened, so while we can react, our viewpoint is flawed.
 
paulears said:
The trouble is we only see the outcome, not what went into making it. Personally, my view with all things forums is that the moderators and admin folk are the ONLY ones who know what happened, so while we can react, our viewpoint is flawed.
Click to expand...

Nevertheless, I valued JB's contributions. Maybe he committed a great offense I'm not aware of, but based on what I know of his political postings which violated forum policies, on the balance I think he was a positive influence on the conversation here
 
paulears said:
The trouble is we only see the outcome, not what went into making it. Personally, my view with all things forums is that the moderators and admin folk are the ONLY ones who know what happened, so while we can react, our viewpoint is flawed.
Click to expand...

This is essentially a correct observation. For the most part, permanent bans are automatically applied to any commercial spamming. This usually is evidenced by foreign language spam attempts that many users report immediately.

Other permanent bans are for cumulative activity that occur both on line and through interaction with a moderator or administrator through repeated personal messages.

Our Forum Guidelines are direct and, for the most part, unambiguous. They apply equally to all members irrespective of length of membership, contributions, etc.

Here is a representative email I received by a member who was posting in the Marketplace. I sent four polite messages to the member requesting that he follow our Guidelines for posting:

You know you really are one sad little man. You actually have the time to sit around on your old, fat ass poo pooing with people's ads?? I just tried to sell a simple camera and you acted like a little kid who got picked on in school and never let it go, then were given some power" and now you poO poO with people just for fun or because they dont follow some childish rules??

I s*%t bigger than you you useless faggot.

By the way, I'll simply rejoin here under a different name and IP address and sell whatever the DOO poo I want to. Too bad you get to hide behind your little screen and aren't out in the real world working on REAL THINGS and dealing with real people instead of a bunch of computer related bulls*%t, forgotten, useless blogs, articles, forums and whatever else it is that poo poos like you get your little faggot rocks off to.

BYE BYE cocksucker.
Click to expand...

Followed up with this parting move by the same member:

He just changed his email on the control panel to:

DavidSaracenoIsAFaggot @ fags.com
Click to expand...

Despite expressing a willingness to work with him about getting sales thread done correctly, and it didn't matter.

This message is just a sample of some of the interaction that occurs with the mods by personal message. Other messages received by other mods are far worse.

Our moderators are unpaid volunteers. What they are subjected to both in the threads and more profoundly by personal message is not shared with other members.

Many factors go into a decision to ban permanently. And this information is not shared beyond the moderators.

Thank you to all members who have posted here and for your contributions. We appreciate the feedback.
 
yikes David, that's so horrible. thank you for absorbing abuse on our behalf.

but isn't it possible that political rants are a lower category of offense than verbal abuse?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top