Reasons to ban a poster.

What are they in your opinion?

If a poster whom we banned under one name comes back under another, should they be banned immediately or given a chance to see if they have learned anything?

Looking for feedback. Personally I think we ban a few too many posters, I think the other mods and ad board think we do not ban enough.

 

[dimeplayersonly]

PEEP.......IMO

posters shouldnt be banned just because they are...useless, boorish, contribute nothing worthwhile ect. just keep them out of meaningful threads.....


posters should be banned (vega comes to mind) if they try to scam other posters or books by posting outright lies or bogus rumors (olympic)

known scammers or stiffs should be booted....(gj aka jacob stearly) the reason they post in forums is to try to lure unsuspecting people, and books into giving them credit.

people that post looking for locals should be warned not to solicit otherwise banned....(i dont know of any reputable local that would take new players that solicited like that)

 

Peep,

Banned at first sight. Shit disturbers generally remain shit distrubers.... they just like rolling around in the stuff and getting others messy as well. Look back at all the ones that have been banned repeatedly and you'll only find a few that have become decent posters.

 

[dimeplayersonly]

sorry........changed my mind a little bit....


if a NEW POSTER posts nothing but crap from the start then yes......kick em out.....


but some whos been here a while and goes through periods of decent stuff mixed with crap ......no

sorry if that seems like its two-faced....

 

[THERECORDKEEPER2]

Needless to say,I think a poster who is banned should be allowed to come back under a different name I have done it around 10 times.However I think before banning someone all the mods should get together and agree upon it,this practice will eliminate what happened to me when JOE was modding. I was banned unfairly at least 8 times.Now I will not sit here and say I was a Saint way back,but I did not do anything that would warrant be banned 8 times!I corrected records ,Joe did not like me questioning people(but now those same people are my freinds and keep honest,accurate records)!
My point is each situation must be dealt with accordingly,I don't think anyone should be banned if a particular MOD does not like or agree with what they are doing!
If the majority of the MODS feel a banning is neccesary,then I also beleive 1 other chance should be given,at that point if the nonsense does not stop then the person should be banned for good!

Thank You
Good Luck!

 

Thanks for feedback guys.

Similiar to what I am getting in offshore. I thought RR would be more "liberal", donno why I thought that.

 

laughing...i think that the suspension is a good punishment. I am sure that there are some who will always be banworthy and who do deserve to be forever banned, then there are those who will be tamed following a suspension.

All of the banning is left to the discretion of the mods, and however u guys deal with it is fine.

Something to think about: when u ban a poster, then continue the argument getting in your last word, it may encourage them to come back rather than just "forget about it."

 

even "The Critic" did some decent posting after a voluntary leave of absence

a guy like oriolegreen or badplayspay could resurface and provide some valuable gametime insight

you never know with some of these characters, so I would go light on the banning.

Is Fred Norris banned forever or what is his status?