Re: Strict Forum Moderation, effective 10-15-2012
It's either do what we do and ignore member questions about our decisions or post discussions about our actions and make a mockery of the system. Either ways when hard decisions are made, we will be the bad guys. Which is fine, I'm not running for president, I already am :p
But jokes apart, what Adam said is spot on, there are countless exchanges, temp bans, further exchanges (in the hopes of amending people's behaviors) and actions before the permanent ban hammer comes down. If history of [ms] serves as any reminder to the friendly environment we have tried to maintain here, I have been the last advocate for permanent bans. It's only when people who we communicate with on an ongoing basis that continue to ignore what's being advised to them, that I finally gave in and agreed to start removing people's access.
Chunky is one such example and if memory serves me right, is the first member to befall that fate.
He went from being moderator (received numerous warnings) to being a member (received further numerous warnings from Adam and myself) to receiving uncountable temp bans (received further warnings) and was eventually ousted, only to make a mockery of the system and return back and show his true colors.
The following bans are not permanent. Both didi and bobjuice are very much active here (yet another example of our unwillingness to perm-bans as they are productive members who post good music and good contributors to the community), they just don't have access to GYY anymore for private reasons.
I do not believe our decisions and subsequent actions need a stamp of approval, but a level of transparency to keep the board sentiment in shape is needed from time to time and I hope this post addresses that need.