Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Site Ideas Forum

Site Ideas Forum

  1. 19 Mar '09 18:56
    i demand, that right DEMAND

    that public forums ban be separate from private forums.

    private forums are private admin censored, often uncensored so what is a bannable offence in public might be quite funny in private.

    what's that you say? people wouldn't care what they posted in public because they could take a 3 day ban and continue posting in private? WRONG - public forum bans would be increased in time. no more 3 days- minimum 7 days.
  2. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    19 Mar '09 21:32 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by trev33
    i demand, that right DEMAND

    that public forums ban be separate from private forums.

    private forums are private admin censored, often uncensored so what is a bannable offence in public might be quite funny in private.

    what's that you say? people wouldn't care what they posted in public because they could take a 3 day ban and continue posting in private? WRONG - public forum bans would be increased in time. no more 3 days- minimum 7 days.
    I don't think there should be a minimum number of days for banning. Keeping it flexible allows more discretion. Not all offenses deserve a 7-day ban.
  3. Standard member Phlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    19 Mar '09 21:39
    Originally posted by trev33
    i demand, that right DEMAND

    that public forums ban be separate from private forums.

    private forums are private admin censored, often uncensored so what is a bannable offence in public might be quite funny in private.

    what's that you say? people wouldn't care what they posted in public because they could take a 3 day ban and continue posting in private? WRONG - public forum bans would be increased in time. no more 3 days- minimum 7 days.
    Russ thought he might do this.

    I was glad I was able to talk him out of it.

    Now Behave.

    P-
  4. 19 Mar '09 21:40
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    I don't think there should be a minimum number of days for banning. Keeping it flexible allows more discretion. Not all offenses deserve a 7-day ban.
    i know, what i was saying is that higher bans could be given out to deter people from posting things not caring about a 3 day public ban because they could still post in private forums.
  5. 19 Mar '09 21:41
    Originally posted by Phlabibit
    Russ thought he might do this.

    I was glad I was able to talk him out of it.

    Now Behave.

    P-
    *sending feedback*
  6. Standard member Raven69
    Different
    20 Mar '09 00:20
    Originally posted by Phlabibit
    Russ thought he might do this.

    I was glad I was able to talk him out of it.

    Now Behave.

    P-
    So YOUR the culprit...
  7. Subscriber Very Rusty
    Treat Everyone Equal
    20 Mar '09 02:28
    Originally posted by trev33
    i know, what i was saying is that higher bans could be given out to deter people from posting things not caring about a 3 day public ban because they could still post in private forums.
    I couldn't post in Private Forum on my GF ban.
  8. Standard member Mctayto
    Highlander
    20 Mar '09 09:20
    For the first time I find myself agreeing with Trev
    I received a forum ban last year which prevented me from posting in public. However the same content posted in public forum is/was OK in the private forums. Therefore to prevent private forum posting in my view is totally wrong.

    If the posting offence committed is so blatently wrong that it is not allowed in public or private forums then a ban across the board would be acceptable otherwise just where the offence was commited.

    If you were to be barred from a pub for wrong behaviour you are not banned from every pub in town.
  9. 20 Mar '09 11:07 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by trev33
    i demand, that right DEMAND

    that public forums ban be separate from private forums.

    private forums are private admin censored, often uncensored so what is a bannable offence in public might be quite funny in private.

    what's that you say? people wouldn't care what they posted in public because they could take a 3 day ban and continue posting in private? WRONG - public forum bans would be increased in time. no more 3 days- minimum 7 days.
    Never going to happen, though I agree it should be OK to post in your private forums.

    The whole idea of the forum ban, however, is to make you think about what you did and prevent you from doing the same again.

    Bans, however, are all down to how others perceive you. Two people can post the same obfuscated obscenity but only one gets banned because they are perceived as being a pain and their post is removed.

    The Mods would have us believe Robomod allegedly picks up many of these obfuscations but that is utter rubbish. When you query this with them you get no reply.

    For example google search the site for f ck put an * after the f brings up all these examples which have not been removed, which means the posters have not been warned

    http://tinyurl.com/d2mfw6

    How diffficult would it be for a mod to do the same google search, or make it an automated process and remove the offending obfuscated swearwords and warn the posters?

    You just have to accept that some people will hate you with a vengeance and if you post something they can report, then they will do so.
  10. Standard member Mctayto
    Highlander
    20 Mar '09 11:47
    Originally posted by adramforall
    Never going to happen, though I agree it should be OK to post in your private forums.

    The whole idea of the forum ban, however, is to make you think about what you did and prevent you from doing the same again.

    Bans, however, are all down to how others perceive you. Two people can post the same obfuscated obscenity but only one gets banned because ...[text shortened]... will hate you with a vengeance and if you post something they can report, then they will do so.
    The excuse I was given at the time was that another user alerted my post/posts. If this is the case then all it requires is a stalker and you will get banned.

    The idea re a forum ban being in place to make you think about what you did post.
    I thought about my posts and feel to this day that I did not use bad language, I post factually correct material. Therefore should not have received a ban other than the fact that I had a stalker.
  11. Standard member Phlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    20 Mar '09 16:06
    Originally posted by Mctayto
    The excuse I was given at the time was that another user alerted my post/posts. If this is the case then all it requires is a stalker and you will get banned.

    The idea re a forum ban being in place to make you think about what you did post.
    I thought about my posts and feel to this day that I did not use bad language, I post factually correct material. Therefore should not have received a ban other than the fact that I had a stalker.
    Excuse me. You were warned twice not to make cheating accusations, or insinuations a player might be cheating. This is a pretty standard rule.

    Only after the third time when in a thread about cheating at RHP you pointed out another users graph. After your other 2 warnings on the subject you received a ban.

    Any alerts are reviewed. Someone having 'a stalker' isn't the reason you were banned, it was earned after you decided to ignore warnings about making accusations as veiled as you may think they were, or unintentional. It was rather clear what you were doing to the moderation team and is all recorded for admins to review if you feel you'd like to send some feedback.

    As for why I am posting this in public, it is to clear it up since you are saying that you were framed. That is not the case.

    P-
  12. Subscriber Very Rusty
    Treat Everyone Equal
    20 Mar '09 16:26
    Originally posted by Phlabibit
    Excuse me. You were warned twice not to make cheating accusations, or insinuations a player might be cheating. This is a pretty standard rule.

    Only after the third time when in a thread about cheating at RHP you pointed out another users graph. After your other 2 warnings on the subject you received a ban.

    Any alerts are reviewed. Someone having ...[text shortened]... it is to clear it up since you are saying that you were framed. That is not the case.

    P-
    WOW 2 warnings: I only get one warning then forum ban! Rather I deserve it or not.
  13. Standard member Phlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    20 Mar '09 16:36
    Originally posted by Very Rusty
    WOW 2 warnings: I only get one warning then forum ban! Rather I deserve it or not.
    This is also not true, you did received 2 warnings before you received a ban. This info is also easy for an admin to view.

    P-
  14. Standard member Red Night
    RHP Prophet
    20 Mar '09 17:38
    Originally posted by Very Rusty
    WOW 2 warnings: I only get one warning then forum ban! Rather I deserve it or not.
    I never get a warning.
  15. Standard member Phlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    20 Mar '09 17:43 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Red Night
    I never get a warning.
    Now THAT is overwhelmingly erroneous.

    You recieved 6 or more warnings and were not issued a ban even though moderators noted you seemed to be looking to get a ban.

    P-