Banned Users

[Scott]

So the forum was "lightly moderated" and got along just fine for almost 20 years until now. I wonder why that is.

 

[datadyne007]

So the forum was "lightly moderated" and got along just fine for almost 20 years until now. I wonder why that is.

If by "got along just fine" you mean ridiculous incessant posting of building heights of every building in this metropolitan area in every thread, absurd rantings and conspiracy theories that triggered repeated reports from members, then yes, we got along just fine with Odurandina.

 

[Johnnyrocket891]

If by "got along just fine" you mean ridiculous incessant posting of building heights of every building in this metropolitan area in every thread, absurd rantings and conspiracy theories that triggered repeated reports from members, then yes, we got along just fine with Odurandina.

"if by "got along just fine" you mean ridiculous incessant posting of building heights of every building in this metropolitan area in every thread, absurd rantings and conspiracy theories "
This is your opinion. Also its an attack on a fellow member on their personal view.
I always found some of his posts added value to the archBoston board.
You could have put Odurandina on ignore but I'm assuming you didn't?

Did Odurandina ever threaten a member, use excessive language or racist comments towards others?

I just don't see why archboston would consider banning Odurandina because of his views.

 

[Scott]

Data, you don't need to twist what I was saying in order to make a point. My fear is that we turn into RR.net where you can be banned for mearly saying the word "bus."
However, I generally don't read what Mr. O posts because it is usually just a long-winded opinion piece with little factual information, but sometimes he surprised me. I suggest people just skim their way through the threads looking for the good stuff. Complaining to the moderators and calling for people's heads is infantile

 

[393b40]

The cagey responses from the moderation team are not helping.

 

[fattony]

The mods were nominated by the community for their level-headed, good judgement. We have vested them with the power to take action based on their judgment and opinions and they came to the present conclusion unanimously. I think they have been very fair in this matter.

 

[Johnnyrocket891]

The mods were nominated by the community for their level-headed, good judgement. We have vested them with the power to take action based on their judgment and opinions and they came to the present conclusion unanimously. I think they have been very fair in this matter.

This is Censorship..... Level-headed and good judgement? That's an opinion baited by others that complain to the moderators.
How about a guideline/policy structure on how a member could actually be banned for. Not opinion based ----censoring other members.
There is a reason why archboston offers a way to put members on ignore.

I really would like to see what really caused Odurandina banishment? I just don't see it.

I really don't have time nor do I care about this. I only brought this up because of the 3 responses I received in the housing thread claiming I'm a former banned member. I just want to know whats acceptable to say on this site and what isn't?

 

[George_Apley]

The cagey responses from the moderation team are not helping.

There were numerous reported posts from members over the last several weeks, including public pronouncements from members that the mods were failing to do our job. There were numerous warning/coaching DMs between mods and Odurandina to induce improved behavior. Intoxicated rambling, mildly belligerent DMs from Odur to multiple mods. At a certain point you make a decision. Which we did. Unanimously.

Data, you don't need to twist what I was saying in order to make a point. My fear is that we turn into RR.net where you can be banned for mearly saying the word "bus."

This will absolutely not happen here under the current mod team.

This is Censorship..... Level-headed and good judgement? That's an opinion baited by others that complain to the moderators.

Censorship this is not.

How about a guideline/policy structure on how a member could actually be banned for.

Not opinion based ----censoring other members.
[...]
I just want to know whats acceptable to say on this site and what isn't?

I just said on the last page that we will be doing that.

 

[F-Line to Dudley]

Oh yeah...the obviously intoxicated late-night posting. That's when the paranoid conspiracy theories with tangible whiff of fascist sympathies would come out in increasingly broken English.


No...I don't think that's a side of people I'm the slightest bit curious to see any more of via the low bar for intervention letting our guard down to subterranean level. It is, if nothing else, anti-relevant to what this board is about in addition to being just plain creepy. Keep the "FW: FW: FW: FW:" tinfoil-hat fever trip to your Grandma's Facebook feed, and think twice about logging on at 2:00am inebriated when the same-height buildings will be there to talk about in the morning spared from your lowered inhibitions. It genuinely weirds people the fuck out to stumble into an ordinary thread and see personal vices being acted out as loss of self-control in real-time.

 

[Scott]

Fifty bucks says he comes back as Johnnyrocket892

 

[Equilibria]

So the forum was "lightly moderated" and got along just fine for almost 20 years until now. I wonder why that is.

The forum was not "lightly moderated", it was effectively "not moderated". Big difference. That wasn't a choice we all made, it was forced on us by a neglectful admin.

And the site definitely did not "get along just fine" - we were about to abandon it at this time last year, in part because of the lack of moderation.

The cagey responses from the moderation team are not helping.

I don't see what's cagey about "we don't ban people often and we haven't been modding very long so there aren't official standards, but we're going to write some".

We all freaking know what this person did to get banned. We all knew what Rif did. We know that both of them have returned/likely will return under different names to poison the pot.

 

[393b40]

And the site definitely did not "get along just fine" - we were about to abandon it at this time last year, in part because of the lack of moderation.

That's a bit of historical revisionism. We were about the abandon it because Briv was an absentee owner and the thing was technically falling over on a monthly basis for multiple days at a time. Not the lack of moderation.

 

[Equilibria]

That's a bit of historical revisionism. We were about the abandon it because Briv was an absentee owner and the thing was technically falling over on a monthly basis for multiple days at a time. Not the lack of moderation.

We went through months of discussion about how to select mods for the replacement site and what powers they should have. I'm not denying that other motivations existed, but the mods who made this decision were selected after a process that began before Ed was on the scene.

 

[Arlington]

So I'm deeply conflicted as a mod.

1) Is my "start by ignoring" advice sustainable? "Just Ignore me" and "Just ignore all acting out" is paradoxical. Particularly if it is in the context of "Just ignore me so that I'm free to act out repeatedly" If I ignore you, does that include your suggestion that I ignore you? If you ignore me have you actually accepted my advice?

2) Is there a productive goal for this conversation on Banning (and Moderation)?
Suggested unproductive: Flagellate the mods or users until they're persuaded to self-flagellate and save the other side the trouble of flagellating.
Suggested productive: Forward-looking behavior changes

Even more productive: Suggest how you (personally) can make the forum better
Less productive: Suggesting how other people can change to accommodate you

Here's how I can make the forum better:
1) Suggest productive topics
2) Elaborate on productive topics
3) Move cool but off-topic stuff to a "Collected Wisdom of" thread
4) Suggest the ignore button more
5) Mods nip out offensive stuff and replace with bracketed reason for excision

 

[KentXie]

Mods, you can't make everyone happy. You can only do what you think is right and I believe in my long history as a member of Archboston, you all have been very fair and transparent. As long as you're being consistent in how you are moderating the site, then you are doing a fine job.

 

[KentXie]

That's a bit of historical revisionism. We were about the abandon it because Briv was an absentee owner and the thing was technically falling over on a monthly basis for multiple days at a time. Not the lack of moderation.

Not at all a historical revisionism. It was both, some were about to abandon it for the reason you mention, others, like me, were about to abandon it for the lack of moderation.

And I can tell you, at least for me, for the first years prior to people like odurandina's arrival, the forum was a fun place for me to check in and participate. Now it's a forum that literally exhausted me of all my energy because of all the bs. Hence why I reduce the number of visits to this site.

 

[kmp1284]

Fifty bucks says he comes back as Johnnyrocket892

I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that he already had a burner account ready for this contingency. Although there are other accounts I could see O having been associated with I think Rif/JR is a separate character.

 

[Scott]

^Yes, I know. I dont think Johnnyrocket is O but he "doth protest too much" so I was just giving him the business

 

[Johnnyrocket891]

Not at all a historical revisionism. It was both, some were about to abandon it for the reason you mention, others, like me, were about to abandon it for the lack of moderation.

And I can tell you, at least for me, for the first years prior to people like odurandina's arrival, the forum was a fun place for me to check in and participate. Now it's a forum that literally exhausted me of all my energy because of all the bs. Hence why I reduce the number of visits to this site.

Why wouldn't you just place the member on Ignore?

 

[fattony]

Why wouldn't you just place the member on Ignore?

I know who I'm going to place on ignore...