Could we have a troll button added to the forum, basically like an open petition button where each user gets to nominate a user once a year. Once they receive a set number of votes, for arguments sake say 20 times, by 20 different users, they are automatically banned from the forums? There has to be some sort of democratic way to police the forums.
Oh, and before anyone might decide to jump down my throat for suggesting this, i might just add that i am just a likely to get a forum ban as anyone else, so fair's fair..
Perhaps to limit abuse users could be limited to one vote a year.
Perhaps even limit the decision to ban a user to the forum mods. But someone gaining 20-50 votes from various people would help push the serial abusers to the top and have them removed at some point.
Anything along these lines..
19 Oct 12
Originally posted by MarinkatombIn fact it is too easy to
Could we have a troll button added to the forum, basically like an open petition button where each user gets to nominate a user once. Once they receive a set number of votes, for arguments sake say 20 times, by 20 different users, they are automatically banned from the forums? There has to be some sort of democratic way to police the forums.
Oh, and b ...[text shortened]... s, i might just add that i am just a likely to get a forum ban as anyone else, so fair's fair..
* have multiple accounts on fake email adresses (has been done and needs some time to be detected, normally such offenders stick out with silly two move-defats in a row)
* organise a witch-hunt.
My suggestion would be an ombudsperson (say a froum moderator) and clear cut "trolling offenses" like
* posting without contents (often)
* ad hominem attacks
* deviatiopn from topic to discuss some minor remark
* ...
more trnsparent decisions would be welcome.
19 Oct 12
Originally posted by PonderableI think this is a debate that needs to be had either way. Openly inviting people into a witch hunt should be a banable offence in itself. But we need something. This isn't perfect, but what is worse, one user getting banned unfairly, on an entire forum of people leaving because of one person?
In fact it is too easy to
* have multiple accounts on fake email adresses (has been done and needs some time to be detected, normally such offenders stick out with silly two move-defats in a row)
* organise a witch-hunt.
My suggestion would be an ombudsperson (say a froum moderator) and clear cut "trolling offenses" like
* posting without ...[text shortened]... from topic to discuss some minor remark
* ...
more trnsparent decisions would be welcome.
Originally posted by MarinkatombSo who are we going to ban, Rjhinds or the Duchess? It's bullying and it's wrong. It's not democracy it's a tyrrany of the majority. Thumbs down let's people know their post is not approved of by however many users, conversley a thumbs up shows someone appreciates a posters contribution. There is no need to allow anyone who happens to be able to whip up a lynch mob to be able to ban contributors out of personal distaste.
Could we have a troll button added to the forum, basically like an open petition button where each user gets to nominate a user once. Once they receive a set number of votes, for arguments sake say 20 times, by 20 different users, they are automatically banned from the forums? There has to be some sort of democratic way to police the forums.
Oh, and b ...[text shortened]... abusers to the top and have them removed at some point.
Anything along these lines..
19 Oct 12
Originally posted by MarinkatombOr they could just drop the banhammer on RJHinds to solve the problem instead.
Could we have a troll button added to the forum, basically like an open petition button where each user gets to nominate a user once. Once they receive a set number of votes, for arguments sake say 20 times, by 20 different users, they are automatically banned from the forums? There has to be some sort of democratic way to police the forums.
Oh, and b ...[text shortened]... abusers to the top and have them removed at some point.
Anything along these lines..
19 Oct 12
Originally posted by Dewi JonesI purposely didn't mention any names as i'm not specifically talking about either of them. Do you remember Bowmann? What about Skeeter?? I can think of a good 10 or 15 people who terrorised the forums for years and were eventually banned, but the damage was done.
So who are we going to ban, Rjhinds or the Duchess? It's bullying and it's wrong. It's not democracy it's a tyrrany of the majority. Thumbs down let's people know their post is not approved of by however many users, conversley a thumbs up shows someone appreciates a posters contribution. There is no need to allow anyone who happens to be able to whip up a lynch mob to be able to ban contributors out of personal distaste.
This is not an open vote that everyone can see and jump on the band wagon. It's a private vote that you can only do ->once a year<-
19 Oct 12
Originally posted by MarinkatombYour edited version would make it more workable. I have mixed feelings about it because
I think this is a debate that needs to be had either way. Openly inviting people into a witch hunt should be a banable offence in itself. But we need something. This isn't perfect, but what is worse, one user getting banned unfairly, on an entire forum of people leaving because of one person?
not all of us define trolling the same way. Judgments wouldn't always be objective.. and
there would be the lingering temptation to gang up on one user. I agree that we need
something.. and yet I'm not comfortable with the idea of imposing severe restrictions.
19 Oct 12
Originally posted by HandyAndyOne vote a year means people have to think about it before they decide to vote for anybody. Again, what is worse, one unhappy user or an entire forum unhappy?
Your edited version would make it more workable. I have mixed feelings about it because
not all of us define trolling the same way. Judgments wouldn't always be objective.. and
there would be the lingering temptation to gang up on one user. I agree that we need
something.. and yet I'm not comfortable with the idea of imposing severe restrictions.
19 Oct 12
Originally posted by MarinkatombHorrible idea. The potential for abuse far outweighs any potential gain. If you don't like someone's posts, then don't read them or respond to them. Your equation of democracy with banning unpopular users is specious at best.
Could we have a troll button added to the forum, basically like an open petition button where each user gets to nominate a user once a year. Once they receive a set number of votes, for arguments sake say 20 times, by 20 different users, they are automatically banned from the forums? There has to be some sort of democratic way to police the forums.
Oh ...[text shortened]... abusers to the top and have them removed at some point.
Anything along these lines..
19 Oct 12
Originally posted by rwingettOne vote a year isn't open to abuse is it?
Horrible idea. The potential for abuse far outweighs any potential gain. If you don't like someone's posts, then don't read them or respond to them. Your equation of democracy with banning unpopular users is specious at best.
19 Oct 12
Originally posted by MarinkatombYou just get together a group of 20 like minded people and they could ban one person per year. You could make a clan out of it. The Banning Clan: The self-appointed arbiters of good taste on the forum.
One vote a year isn't open to abuse is it?
It's a horrible idea.
19 Oct 12
Originally posted by rwingettI agree with rwingett. Strange but true.
You just get together a group of 20 like minded people and they could ban one person per year. You could make a clan out of it. The Banning Clan: The self-appointed arbiters of good taste on the forum.
It's a horrible idea.
19 Oct 12
Originally posted by rwingettAlready been done. They're called... hmm... too frightened... I need to grow a pair. Say it for me Robbie.
You just get together a group of 20 like minded people and they could ban one person per year. You could make a clan out of it. The Banning Clan: The self-appointed arbiters of good taste on the forum.
It's a horrible idea.
19 Oct 12
orangutan's spam-removal script (I'd recommend version 2, which just leaves a blank line where the post had been, and doesn't identify the spammer) is an effective way of removing the corrupting effect of a serial offender, without said offender being victimised in any way. Since this is presently only available to Firefox users, we could persuade our programmers to make it available to all users, by providing the suggested "remove troll" button to do exactly what that script does now?
Doesn't make any judgements, spammer/troller is free to continue his/her activities without bothering other users, and if the worst offenders are "removed" other regular posters won't even be tempted to respond and thereby encourage the offender.