Feature Request: Ban List

Forums › Geekzone › Feature Request: Ban List

1 | 2 | 3

eracode

805 posts

Ultimate Geek

Subscriber

Reply # 597448 20-Mar-2012 07:18
xpd: We dont need you guys seeing the usual reasons for banning... "Didnt call me sir" "Dont like their lack of spellcheck" "Didnt buy me a drink at the GZPE" ... and, last but not least, ignorance in the correct use of apostrophe's.

Ragnor

6939 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 597537 20-Mar-2012 10:21
networkn: It's disappointing to me that this thread even exists and I sincerely hope that it never gets implemented in any form, which has nothing to do with my recent break away and everything to do with common sense and decency. Surely there are better things do to than investigate/compile bans and the reasons behind them? No nefarious intentions. When you see a regular poster with the big read "Inactive User" in a thread you are posting in, even replying to one of their posts... you don't wonder what happened?

networkn

4858 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 597542 20-Mar-2012 10:30
Ragnor: networkn: It's disappointing to me that this thread even exists and I sincerely hope that it never gets implemented in any form, which has nothing to do with my recent break away and everything to do with common sense and decency. Surely there are better things do to than investigate/compile bans and the reasons behind them? No nefarious intentions. When you see a regular poster with the big read "Inactive User" under their name you don't wonder what happened? Sure, but that doesn't mean I should know. It certainly should not be made public consumption. I would suggest most inactive users are due to an unintentional breach of the FUG, but making the list available with it's reasons would invite conflict, perhaps ridicule and discussion which may or may not support the moderators decision which I can't see being taken lightly either. If you don't post the reason, what possible valid reason is there for a compiled list? If a user is inactive, then when or if they return, ask them privately I guess. I understand the reasons behind the request, but I don't' agree with it, and honestly, before it gets more attention than it has already attracted, the thread should be locked.

freitasm

BDFL
44237 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Subscriber

Reply # 597562 20-Mar-2012 11:14
Folks, I know it's all part of morbid curiosity thing. There are many stories behind a ban, but I will make some stuff clear and not be specific: We can not disclose why we banned someone, without infringing the Privacy Act. We do have checks in place to prevent spam in the forums. This includes keywords, country blocking, automatted email and username checks with stopforumspam.com at the time of registration. If we get a spammer that passed those checks the account is instantly banned, posts removed and reported to stopforumspam.com We do not accept personal attacks. In most cases moderators edit the post and contact the user in private. If this behaviour continues then we ban the account. It's very rare to have a user banned on first warning (unless it's pure spam from the start or a severe breach of FUG). The FUG is a guideline and we follow it. In some occasions discretion will be used, because we can't cover everything in the FUG. If a user asks to have the account removed we usually negotiate a "soft ban": posts remain in the forums, but the account has no access to the site anymore, and won't show up in the profile pages, disappearing from search engines after a while. Usually we do this when someone is worried about their personal information being available through search (although it's easy to just remove name, country from profile and leave at that). Unless it's a spammer, any ban is discussed by moderators inside a private forum. If a moderator objects to the ban and shows a strong enough case we consider reinstating the account. This only happened a couple of times, and in a matter of months these people turned abusive again and we banned the account for good. Moderators know their profiles are at stake when they back the wrong person. I usually don't respond emails from people who were banned, unless it's someone who previously had a Trusted status or someone I personally know. I consider invoking Godwin's Law a severe breach of FUG and whoever does it will be banned on sight. Over the years we have many people who were banned here, and tried to sneak back in. In only one occasion so far we had to contact the parents of a minor who were very disruptive. The parents were appaled and we received an apology email later from this person. He never registered on Geekzone again. In the last few months we had a fair share of people who seem to to take virtual as a reality. We have the case of someone who was banned, and goes around spreading defamatory statements about myself. We also have the case of someone who posted my personal information in a public website, telling me that "[you] can buy the domain from myself for $100" and that "...people dislike you Mauricio, I am giving them a way to reach out to you. There is nothing wrong with this." Some also say that our ban infringes their "freedom of speech", without realising that this is a private property, and they are allowed here by the owner. This is not a given right. One threatened us with legal action because of the ban. Another tried to contact me saying that since his actions were not exactly spelled out in the FUG, the ban should be lifted. I am actually considering and will be putting forward to the moderators a permanent check to make sure minors do not create accounts on Geekzone, even though those are not the biggest troublemakers. Mauricio Freitas (Geekzone Admin, Devil's Advocate, my blog, technology disclosure, my tweets, Web Performance Optimization) Geekzone Price comparison \| Amazon Kindle order page \| How to get the best out of Geekzone \| New Zealand IT Jobs \| Geekzone News \| Jinglebugs

xpd

Minecraft n00b
5346 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 597577 20-Mar-2012 11:22
eracode: xpd: We dont need you guys seeing the usual reasons for banning... "Didnt call me sir" "Dont like their lack of spellcheck" "Didnt buy me a drink at the GZPE" ... and, last but not least, ignorance in the correct use of apostrophe's. Hey, I'm a moderator, not a teacher :) XPD / @DemiseNZ / Gavin Website CPU : Intel E5300 GFX: Geforce 9800GTX/+ RAM: 3GB DDR2 A+ - MCDST - MCTS CCNA Arriving soon.

freitasm

BDFL
44237 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Subscriber

Reply # 597579 20-Mar-2012 11:24
eracode: ... and, last but not least, ignorance in the correct use of apostrophe's (sic). I hope that extra apostrophe in apostrophes was just a bit of a joke, not how you write it... Mauricio Freitas (Geekzone Admin, Devil's Advocate, my blog, technology disclosure, my tweets, Web Performance Optimization) Geekzone Price comparison \| Amazon Kindle order page \| How to get the best out of Geekzone \| New Zealand IT Jobs \| Geekzone News \| Jinglebugs

nate

3bit.com
5428 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 597590 20-Mar-2012 11:40
freitasm: Folks, I know it's all part of morbid curiosity thing. I'll toss in my 2 cents. 99% of who we ban are spammers. Even the remaining 1% are not even interesting enough to tell my mum about. The volume is so low, the last time I personally banned someone would be at least three months ago, and I'm on here every day (check my post count, it's ridiculous). Even the spammers who get through are not that many - freitasm has a whole raft of checks and blocks that stops most people getting past the front gate. It's a very very small percentage of people who make bans interesting. On the grand scheme of things, taking into account the number of active users and posts, the "crap" would make this new feature, even if it was implemented, pretty boring... Custom software development \| Mt Eden Cafe \| Gardening Blog \| Gardening.co.nz

kiwitrc

2844 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 597595 20-Mar-2012 11:43
nate: freitasm: Folks, I know it's all part of morbid curiosity thing. I'll toss in my 2 cents. 99% of who we ban are spammers. Even the remaining 1% are not even interesting enough to tell my mum about. The volume is so low, the last time I personally banned someone would be at least three months ago, and I'm on here every day (check my post count, it's ridiculous). Even the spammers who get through are not that many - freitasm has a whole raft of checks and blocks that stops most people getting past the front gate. It's a very very small percentage of people who make bans interesting. On the grand scheme of things, taking into account the number of active users and posts, the "crap" would make this new feature, even if it was implemented, pretty boring... How about you make some stuff up then?

nate

3bit.com
5428 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 597607 20-Mar-2012 12:16
kiwitrc: How about you make some stuff up then? Done! :) Custom software development \| Mt Eden Cafe \| Gardening Blog \| Gardening.co.nz

1 | 2 | 3