[Gen] On The Subject of Bannings and Unban Requests...

... obviously we're discussing the banning and unbanning thing in the MS, but I find that we rarely ask what y'all think. So I was curious... what do y'all think?

Specifically:
- What is your opinion on people having to/not having to submit unban requests for bans of set or variable length? (i.e. variable = indefinite bans)
- What is your opinion on the current policy of only the banning moderator may unban you?
- Do you have any other general thoughts on banning, other than they shouldn't be used (which isn't a realistic viewpoint)?

I know what *I* think; I'm curious 'bout you guys (and gals)...

 

What is your opinion on people having to/not having to submit unban requests for bans of set or variable length? (i.e. variable = indefinite bans)

Set leangth, no... If someone gets slapped with a 24-48 then I honestly think a person should NOT have to submit an Unban request unless they genuinley question the reason.

- What is your opinion on the current policy of only the banning moderator may unban you?

I don't think it's fair to either party. The Mod and the user both have lives outside the JC...

- Do you have any other general thoughts on banning, other than they shouldn't be used (which isn't a realistic viewpoint)?

If a user gets banned for baiting flaming, I really think the offended party should be told 'Yes, this person was banned because of their actions' as apposed to being left out of the loop. After all, how is a person to know that the perpitrator was actually 'punished' as apposed to just not bothering to log in?

 

- What is your opinion on people having to/not having to submit unban requests for bans of set or variable length? (i.e. variable = indefinite bans)

If you decide that people need to send in unban requests, it needs to CLEARLY state on the banned page that that is a requirement for getting unbanned. I know on my first ban, i had no idea I had to, nor did I really understand what one was.

I don't care if that's the policy, but it needs to be clearer. It's not fair to the new users to expect them to know this. A sticky in comms about "so you're banned, here's what you can do" would also be good. If i was a n00b and got banned and it just went on forever and ever, I would probably never return. Or it'd be months before I tried again (probably with a different name). It'll just drive the users away.

- What is your opinion on the current policy of only the banning moderator may unban you?

I think this policy is good because it forces individual responsibility. If that moderator cannot be there, they are still in charge of getting the user unbanned, and need to ask another moderator to do it for them. And one might say that is sucks that one moderator has complete control over your ban, but that is what the admins are for, and there ARE 4 admins. I also think that a banned user should be able to contact more than 1 admin, and not be forced to deal with only one.

- Do you have any other general thoughts on banning, other than they shouldn't be used (which isn't a realistic viewpoint)?

I understand that long bans should require communication with the user before unbanning. If someone did something disruptive enough to earn a ba, say, over a week, i think it's a good idea to talk to that user, to figure out how they will act in the future.

As far as bans UNDER a week go, I think it's a bit over the top to expect communication from the users. Maybe a week is a bit much, but at least 3 days. I mean, if you're banned for 3 days or less, and you see that you're banned, you may assume it was merely something minor.

Not all users have moderator "Friends" that they can get to explain to them what happened.

I like the idea of a brief PM upon unbanned explaining why the user was banned, and what the general consequences would be of a repeat offense. *shrug* I don't think unban requests should be required for short bans.

 

- What is your opinion on people having to/not having to submit unban requests for bans of set or variable length? (i.e. variable = indefinite bans)
I would think that it is neither imparative nor appropriate to submit an unban request during a ban of set length unless you disagree with the reason for the banning. However if you present your case to the Mod in question and are denied, it is still permissable PM an Admin for further review, correct?
Having said that, for a variable ban, it would make sense to have said request available. For, just as time changes the trees, it changes people's minds. It very well may be that the offender or Moderation team have reversed their position on whatever the issue was, ergo allowing the offender access to the boards is appropriate once more.

What is your opinion on the current policy of only the banning moderator may unban you?
As long as said mod is available (ie. not on vacation, ect) or there exists a reliable backup, then I think the policy is fine.
Bear in mind, that I think there needs to be a higher authority to plead to, should the Mod deny your unban request somewhat without reason. Not to question authority, and I understand that it is a judgement call, but when asked for an explanation by the offending user, perhaps it would be appropriate to cite specific examples as per expected by users when reporting offenses.

Do you have any other general thoughts on banning, other than they shouldn't be used (which isn't a realistic viewpoint)?
I think that if a policy exists which states that the Mods are not to be responsible for discerning 'jokes' from flames, baits, ect, then it should always be enforced. Moreover, I disapprove of a user reporting an offens that happened 'some time ago' when that very thread may be still open/active and no action is taken. It should not matter when the offense took place, only that the offense took place. Even if it is as little as a warning to avoid it in the future, I would be more satisfied than 'It happened so long ago that we cannot punish that user.' I am not aware of a statute of limitations.

Master Mishima

 

- What is your opinion on people having to/not having to submit unban requests for bans of set or variable length? (i.e. variable = indefinite bans)

I think any ban over 3 days should require an unban request in all cases. That unban request should also follow the terms of the TOS, as posts and PMs do. It's communication made through the JC, so it should fall under the JC's rules. This applies for both the banned person, and the mod/admin who they are communicating with,

- What is your opinion on the current policy of only the banning moderator may unban you?

I know some mods are probably pretty good about this, but what happens if another mod mysteriously disappears, as has happened often in the past year? I don't know exactly how the process works, but an administrator should oversee (and step in to unban) any unban requests if the mod isn't already on top of the situation.


-Do you have any other general thoughts on banning

I don't know if there's a set number of bans one must acrue before a permban is slapped on. But I know there are an awful lot of users with a *lot* of bans on their record who still post here. Why? If they have done something to warrant bans say, 6 times, what makes anyone think they are sudenly "reformed" and won't pick up a seventh ban?

But Brad, what about our "case-by-case" basis we like to use all the time? Glad you asked.

Still do a case-by-case basis approach on those who have racked up a long record of bans. Check to see what they were banned for, and if they've been banned for the same reason more than a couple times. But the tolerance for a possible return should reduce exponentially with each ban after the third similar one.

I've seen a user who recently came back from a six-month ban who is basically picking up right where he left off, using the exact same behavior that got him banned in the first place. This should not happen, and exopses either protection from other mods, or a flaw in the unban system in general.

 

- What is your opinion on people having to/not having to submit unban requests for bans of set or variable length? (i.e. variable = indefinite bans)

On bans of one week or shorter, I think that the ban should be set and that no unban request be necessary.

- What is your opinion on the current policy of only the banning moderator may unban you?

If it's a week long or shorter ban, I think that any mod should be able to unban the user, though it's preferable that the user be unbanned by the mod who banned him in the first place.

]- Do you have any other general thoughts on banning, other than they shouldn't be used (which isn't a realistic viewpoint)?

Not reallly.

 

- What is your opinion on people having to/not having to submit unban requests for bans of set or variable length? (i.e. variable = indefinite bans)

It makes sense for a week or less ban

- What is your opinion on the current policy of only the banning moderator may unban you?

I think it's rediculous. Any mod should be able to unban a banned user

- Do you have any other general thoughts on banning, other than they shouldn't be used (which isn't a realistic viewpoint)?

I still standby my thought that if you are banned for a longer period of time than a mod told you you would be(ex: My 1st ban was an hour or two late on the unban) then said user should get time served on their next banning.

 

I don't think it matters much either way how things are done, so long as things are uniform for all mods and all members. No more "Some mods do it one way, some another" because if some mods won't unban users without an unban request, you're going to have to post a list or something so people will know, and that's just absurd. And no more "User A has to submit an unban request, but User B doesn't."

And if you're going to put a time limit on when unban requests are necessary for unbanning, you're going to have to include ban length in the offending posts, which sort of defeats the purpose of not making bans public.

- What is your opinion on the current policy of only the banning moderator may unban you?

I've always supported that policy. But like Tracy said, mods absolutely have to be responsible in unbanning users. A couple of hours won't hurt anybody, especially someone who can't be bothered to follow the rules. But when it's 12 or more hours past time, that's just neglectful on the mod's part. Mods have their own rules they need to follow, too.

- Do you have any other general thoughts on banning, other than they shouldn't be used (which isn't a realistic viewpoint)?

Back to unban requests, mods should also make an effort to reply as soon as possible. The Informational Thread (which everyone agrees is well out of date, but still), says the wait could be anywhere from 1-3 days, which is ridiculous, since most bans don't last that long. You guys know when you've banned someone, so it shouldn't be too hard to check the unban requests page. Like say, right before logging off and immediately after logging on again. And if you're on for a while, repeatedly during that time.

Amazing.

 

What is your opinion on people having to/not having to submit unban requests for bans of set or variable length? (i.e. variable = indefinite bans)

Okay, how is someone to know if their ban is 24 hours or if it's 2 weeks or something? If they're banned, they can only communicate with the administration via the unban request form.

What I would do is wait it out 48 hours. If still banned, fill out the unban form and find out what the problem was and how long the ban should be. If it's not already policy, it should be that every accused member should be given the right to know that information if they ask.

What is your opinion on the current policy of only the banning moderator may unban you?

Short answer: Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb.

Long answer: Considering how frequent mod vacations are here (I don't post much nowadays, but I read the updates and I know I see at least 1-2 mods taking a break every week), I wouldn't want to be banned for a week for a 24-hour infraction simply because the mod is out on a business trip for the rest of the week. Doesn't everyone in the Mod Squad have access to seeing each member's log for proof?

Do you have any other general thoughts on banning, other than they shouldn't be used (which isn't a realistic viewpoint)?

Not offhand.

 

... obviously we're discussing the banning and unbanning thing in the MS, but I find that we rarely ask what y'all think. So I was curious... what do y'all think?


Thank you for taking the time to ask what we think. I greatly appreciate it


- What is your opinion on people having to/not having to submit unban requests for bans of set or variable length? (i.e. variable = indefinite bans)

I think that you should have to fill out an unban request form, regardless of the length of the ban. The exception to that being bans for games. The whole point of banning someone is that they've broken the rules, and the point of an unban request is to show that you understand the rules and will obey them in the future.

- What is your opinion on the current policy of only the banning moderator may unban you?

I don't particularly like it. The moderator that banned you may not be online when you are, and I don't see why another mod couldn't unban you in most cases.

- Do you have any other general thoughts on banning, other than they shouldn't be used (which isn't a realistic viewpoint)?


Once a new ban policy has been hammered out, I'd like to see it stickied in Comms. That might cut down on the number of threads dedicated to individual ban issues(which aren't supposed to have threads in Comms).

Thanks for taking the time to listen to us regular users!

 

First off, I love the responses so far. Good stuff!

Okay, how is someone to know if their ban is 24 hours or if it's 2 weeks or something? If they're banned, they can only communicate with the administration via the unban request form.

As a note, it's never been a problem for banned users to log in with a sock and PM a member of the administration to seek clarfication on a ban.

 

- What is your opinion on people having to/not having to submit unban requests for bans of set or variable length? (i.e. variable = indefinite bans)

I think an unban request should be required in all cases. This way a member is forced to recognize that his/her behavior is unacceptable. If the behavor is changed or not is a whole other story, but at least it is brought to his/her attention. He/She cannot claim to not know what they did was wrong. Unban requests also set a length of time for the ban. Not all mods give you the "See you in 24" types of edits, when banned.

- What is your opinion on the current policy of only the banning moderator may unban you?

I think the banning moderator should be the one to respond to the unban request unless the situation has gone as far as MS. At that point anyone knowing the entire situation could respond. After the banning mod has listened to the request, and responded to it with the apporpriate information, any mod should unban the user when it is time.

As I see it, the only reason for the banning mod to be the only one to unban the user is if no one else knows the situation on the ban. If an unban request is sent in, there will be better documentation on the ban durration and such. Thus negating the reason for the original mod to unban the user. (sorry if this is choppy, I have a bad habit of trying to type profound things in the middle of the night)


- Do you have any other general thoughts on banning, other than they shouldn't be used (which isn't a realistic viewpoint)?

Just what I've pointed out above and that there should be lengthened bans on multiple offences (if there isn't already). You know, if a user gets a ban for an offence, then repeats the offence the ban should be doubled (or whatever). Just like jail, repeat offenders get longer sentances each time until they just get put away forever.

 

from burds_sock thread:

I use my sock matrix .............to inform certain users that I am banned so they dont wonder what happened to me .

Need some clarification on this... I thought you were not allowed to PM with socks while banned for purposes other than contacting a mod for assistance? I realize this is almost impossible to moderate, but it's discouraged, right?

 

it is ????????????????????

I (comet1440) use this sock to pm when I am banned . I thought you just couldnt post , but you cant pm either ???

 

Users can use socks to PM moderators while banned. They cannot post using a sock while banned.

 

I think anyone should be able to unban you if they see it needing to be done. I don't think only the moderator that banned you should unban you. What if the person that banned you resigns from beging a mod? Then you are banned forever. Sometimes personal feelings have to do with the length of a ban. Allow someone who is objective to do the unbanning.

Not saying all mods let their personal feelings get in the way. I think it does happen however.

-Seldon

 

Users can use socks to PM moderators while banned. They cannot post using a sock while banned.

Yeah... but I was asking about using PMs to just communicate with regular users. NOT moderators.

 

I think anyone should be able to unban you if they see it needing to be done. I don't think only the moderator that banned you should unban you. What if the person that banned you resigns from beging a mod? Then you are banned forever. Sometimes personal feelings have to do with the length of a ban. Allow someone who is objective to do the unbanning.

Having the banning mod handle the unbanning is a general rule. If a mod steps down, or leaves on vacation, we usually know about it and take that into account when unban requests come in. I've handled many unban requests for other mods who have stepped down.

Yeah... but I was asking about using PMs to just communicate with regular users. NOT moderators.

Technically, it would be against the rules (you're only supposed to use the sock to PM a moderator), but there is no way that we can reasonably enforce it. Unless you are using the sock to flame other users, we'll likely never hear of it.

Kimball Kinnison

 

I wish there was a way the banned user could log on and read a PM from the moderator stating why they were banned. i think having a sock is just a pain. When I have been banned, i am always scratching my head on why until i logon with a sock, which i thinks a pain. Cant there be a time clock that the banning mod can place on the account that gives 60 minutes for the user to read the ban PM and why and when that 60 minutes ends, that user accout is on the ban. Now if the user still posts during that 60 minutes prior, then they obviously dont care and the mod can just ban on the spot if the user is posting.

 

I for one believe the banning mod should do the unbanning. Does an unban request need to be filled out. Only if you dont agree with it. But no other mod should unban a person if the length of the ban is not up. You need uniformity and mods need to know other mods will back there decisions up. Only an admin should be able to turn over an unban request and only after talking it over with the banning mod.

 

Okay, how is someone to know if their ban is 24 hours or if it's 2 weeks or something? If they're banned, they can only communicate with the administration via the unban request form.

You are also permitted to log in as a sock and communicate with a Mod via PM (although you're not allowed to actually post anything).

 

- What is your opinion on the current policy of only the banning moderator may unban you?

I feel that, if the ban is for a straightforward offense and a specific duration, such as 24 hours, then we should allow different Mods to unban users if the original Mod handling it isn't online at the time. I can understand it when more complicated issues are best left to the Mod in question, but for the standard stuff it's just going to be more efficient and helpful all round if other Mods can help out when needed.

I feel the same way with cross-board Modding. If it's something cut 'n' dried like swearing or Ep3 spoilers outside 3SA or approved threads, I would like to and have felt comfortable in editing/warning/banning users where necessary. When it's something more involved, then I would PM the appropriate Mod for the board just in case they haven't noticed it yet, and let them handle it. I've had a couple other Mods help out in CT with straightforward stuff when I wasn't online, and I'm grateful to them for it.

 

However, even the simplest things can become complicated when there are things you can't trace via the tools available (notes, unban requests, posts). I'd like to think those are exceptions, though.

 

-What is your opinion on people having to/not having to submit unban requests for bans of set or variable length? (i.e. variable = indefinite bans)

I'm not entirely sure i know what you mean, but i can try. Well, i think it would be a good convenience not having to submit unban requests. I've had plenty of bans where i knew what was going on, and then on the other hand i've had plenty where i had no earthly idea what was going on and i had to go around everywhere i thought i'd posted during the day to try to figure out what my banning was for. Turns out, there was no edit anywhere in my posts telling why i was banned 90% of the time. I think it would help if the mod/admin that bans you finds some way of getting a note through the system to you so you would know why. It's common respect.

- What is your opinion on the current policy of only the banning moderator may unban you?

Well, if another mod thinks you deserve to be unbanned then i think they should be entitled to lenthen/shorten your banning time.

- Do you have any other general thoughts on banning, other than they shouldn't be used (which isn't a realistic viewpoint)?

I don't think it should repeatedly be seen as a "slap on the wrist" because the mods here aren't anyone's parents...other than that i have no real viewpoints on it.

 

Well, if another mod thinks you deserve to be unbanned then i think they should be entitled to lenthen/shorten your banning time.

So you are in favor of some mods undermining the authority of other mods? That's a pretty horrible idea.