Re: Lifetime Ban on GS
Zafra would def agree with that 
Re: Lifetime Ban on GS
Transparency is the key. Disagree with Zafra and Dasnerys slightly on the mechanism. Their proposal is providing a list of banned folks and the reason. I would suggest the following:
Simply cut and paste the posst or posts that led to the ban. To provide context, provide a link to the thread where the post occurred. And provide where in the thread the post occurred.
Also provide the name of the person who banned the Individual in question. Along with anyone else who approved the ban.
The administrators or the banned persons DO NOT get to debate the validity (or lack thereof) of the ban. Let the members decide for themselves.
This will remove bans for frivolous reasons. Especially life time bans.
If I ever get banned, I don’t want it advertised on GS. The ban reasons are not discussed, only to keep the dignity of the banned member intact. Even though not posting the reason cost us our credibility, the proof of which is chacha ghalibs post who is thinking that I banned someone because I was having a bad day, and posters were only politely discussing something, I would never publicly post a reason.
Very recently, someone got banned because that person sent an intehai wahiyaat pm to another poster. The pm was so vulgar that it was embarrassing to be discussed even in the mod forum because we have so many female mods.
In other cases, someone gets a ban not because of one incident but a constant history of that person.
Point is that even if we become transparent, it would be impossible to share every reason with general members.
Re: Lifetime Ban on GS
^ good points, as always, TLK. There is a simple workatound re: keeping the dignity of the banned person. When the banned person receives the notice, give him/her an option to choose if the particular post that caused the ban can be posted for public consumption. This kind of levels the playing field. If he chooses no, he saves his dignity. If he chooses yes, the forum members get an opportunity to see who banned him and who approved the ban and for what post.
Note that in my post, my recommendation was NOT to provide a reason. But to simply provide the offending post with a link to the thread and location of the post in that thread.
Yes. It is not perfect. As you stated, some may get banned not because of one incident but a constant history of that person. Fair enough. This is still a small community. There are several who ARE familiar with the “constant history of various persons”. So they do have context about the person’s history, ideology and perspective. In an earlier post, I believe you had used a persons “agenda” as a possible reason. Again, fair enough. But if the person has a record of a particular “agenda” or “history”, that would be well established within the community at large.
Simply give the banned person to choose if the offending post be posted or not. As I stated earlier, the banned person does NOT get to argue or debate the merits (or lack thereof) of the ban. And the person doing the ban does NOT get yt add any reason other than posting offending post with link to thread.
The community will be able to easily identify trends re a specific authority and a specific banned person. This would be transparency at its best. Some checks and balances.
Is this perfect? No. Is it a step in the right direction? I would respectfully submit - a resounding yes. But no matter what, I love this community.
Re: Lifetime Ban on GS
The banned member is being advertised with the word banned under their nick. However, the reason is not specified which gives their friends the impression that they are being banned because someone in the management has an axe to grind.
As for me thinking that you were having a bad day. There is no way to read that blog entry and your response and not come to the conclusion that you were just having a bad day. We had seen your behaviour as the director, which was exemplary, so it was a bit of a shock to see you lash out over something which wasn’t very offensive. On top of that, it was in the blogs which I thought were less moderated and more like echo chambers where like minded people re-enforce each other’s views. If a blog was offensive to people, they had the option of not going back in there.
I am saying this from an impartial POV because neither CM nor jaanwar were my pals and I hardly knew stoppit. This is a case in which we see the reason for the ban and it doesn’t sound that good. So, can you understand that for cases where it’s totally in the dark, people are skeptical?
If a member’s behaviour is so outrageous that it warrants a permanent ban, why can’t they be shamed?You don’t have to share every little detail but the jist of the offence.
Re: Lifetime Ban on GS
" If a member’s behaviour is so outrageous that it warrants a permanent ban, why can’t they be shamed?You don’t have to share every little detail but the jist of the offence."
Chacha, most times I find myself agreeing with your logic. Slightly disagree here. When the authority bans a person AND provides a “jist of the offence” to shame the banned person, the latter is left defenceless. More like adding insult to injury. The authority is judge, jury and executioner. I would prefer no reason to the said Authority’s version of the “just of the offence”. A more objective approach would be to list the “offensives post” in its entirety with link to thread to provide context. This leaves no room for “he said she said”.
Am beginning to sound like a broken record. So will back off.
Thanks to Mods for opportunity to type my opinion.
Re: Lifetime Ban on GS
Well, the banned person isn’t getting an opportunity to defend himself either way. I don’t think the offender is given the opportunity to dispute the evidence for his ban. By banning him, someone somewhere has already decided that his actions merit a ban and thus played the part of judge, jury and executioner. I don’t quite see how disclosing the reasons for the ban add or subtract anything. If the offence is so serious that it warranst the most severe punishment, why can’t it be disclosed to shut up the offender’s pals who create drama afterwards?
Re: Lifetime Ban on GS
Chacha ji. Lagta hai aapne post # chaurasi dhyan se nahin padha (gaur and parha for the Urduites).
If the offending post is displayed and the thread in which it occurred pointed out, the banned person does get his day in court (court of public opinion). This is far more objective than settling for the Authority’s version of the “jist of the offence”.
Re: Lifetime Ban on GS
Hahahahahahahhaa.
Chacha, regarding the names you took, I agree that stoppit ban was my mistake and I reverted the decision within couple of days. Stoppit is around so you can ask her yourself. Rest of the two names; I don’t regret the decision neither I feel obligated to explain in front of others.
Having said that, both parties are off the hook anyways. One’s ban I already lifted, and the other is around with another multi. Our policy of ban is that we ban all the multis of the member in case of lifetime ban, but in this case we are looking the other way.
It’s ok that person’s name says banned under him or her. We are not hiding the ban, we are just not discussing the reason behind the ban. That is our policy and it’s working fine for most of the time.
Re: Lifetime Ban on GS
Now everyone shut up and move along. March is coming!
Re: Lifetime Ban on GS
^ Am more petrified of Le Pak. Can imagine her scanning posts, gleefully targeting unsuspecting victims. Don’t want to provide more material. Request for transparency withdrawn. Retroactively.
Elle est impitoyable