A Public "Hall of Shame"?

[Darren]

Given that we've had to ban a couple of people recently, and there has been the predicatable "why...?" thread, do members want a public "hall of shame" forum where we post details of those who have been banned?

The forum would be read-only and only viewable by members. Guests wouldn't have access.

It would NOT be a forum to debate the reasons behind a ban. It would simply be for information.

 

[lies]

Given that we've had to ban a couple of people recently, and there has been the predicatable "why...?" thread, do members want a public "hall of shame" forum where we post details of those who have been banned?

I don't think we need all the details, but it'd be nice to know who has been banned and why, yes.

The forum would be read-only

Would it be possible to ask questions though without having to contact a moderator?

The forum would be [...] only viewable by members.

I think that would probably be wise.

I'd pick a different title though.

(When did you become just Darren?)

 

[RobertFKennedy]

Darren, I dont think it would be particularly beneficial like that. If it is a read only forum people will seek to debate the ban in general discussion anyway.

Perhaps if it wasn't read only people would take debates and discussions about how the board is run, bannings etc onto that forum keeping it away from general discussion and the rest of the board.

that way, those who dont want to read arguments or debates about bannings and moderation issues can just steer clear of that forum.

I'd suggest posting the reason for the ban, warning etc and make sure comment on the incident is kept to that specific thread, removing or locking any duplication threads. I dont think people should be gagged but at the same time I think it could be taken away from the general discussion forum which should be other for things.

 

[SFG75]

I'm all for it, this kind of thing is available on other boards for all to see. How about a corresponding hall of fame?

 

[Darren]

My only worry with a non read-only forum is that it would turn into a slanging match with various people saying things like "this is crap..", but I'll consider it if enough people want it that way.

(Lies, I thought that just "Darren" seemed more friendly and approachable.)

 

[Martin]

I think it's a good idea, and I also think it should be read-only. The latest bout of nastiness in the GC-area proves that.

 

[RobertFKennedy]

My only worry with a non read-only forum is that it would turn into a slanging match with various people saying things like "this is crap..", but I'll consider it if enough people want it that way.

(Lies, I thought that just "Darren" seemed more friendly and approachable.)

even if it is a bit of a slanging match it keeps it away from the rest of the forum. a good few forums have a similar type of thing. and if it gets out of hand just take action against the posters responsible as in any of the other forums.

 

[ruby]

This is a good idea to have a read only! If you open it your only going to cause a debate which would turn nasty,the lastest goings on have proved that! Theres been a lot of unrest of late!

 

[Peder]

Here's one cent worth, or less:

Private, members only: yes, definitely.

Offender's handle, the violation or "crime", and the supporting example(s) or "evidence": yes
Name people banned: yes
Name people warned: no. To preserve personal dignity and privacy rights (big thing in US). Show warnings only for people also eventually banned, to document the record.

Read only: not necessarily. It could be the single participatory place for brawls, er, ahem, questions, comments and discussion about site administration and policies away from the general public, or even for undignified brawls in general.

That's a little more formal than a place where I come from and it works pretty well there. People whose brawling gets out of line in public are sugested by either members or moderators to take it to the private place (which has some suitably picturesque name).

But you would know best what fits,
Peder

 

[Kookamoor]

I voted 'no', just because I'm not it's necessary to have a specific forum devoted to this purpose. Surely just a mention under 'Site News and Updates' would suffice. This is already a read only forum and all that would be required is a message saying, "Unfortunately, due to multiple infringments against the membership agreement, XXX has been banned from the forum." Inevitable discussion may then take place in the GC section.

I think this sort of notification is necessary when the member has been long-standing or has caused considerable problems on the forum (the former in the case of one such as Bobby, the latter in the case of a new user who offends a lot of people in a short time before being banned). Otherwise the lack of transparency leads to rumourmongering and bad feelings among the members. At the discretion of the mods perhaps it may be possible for the banned member to also post a final message to the members on this same thread.

 

[sirmyk]

Surely just a mention under 'Site News and Updates' would suffice. This is already a read only forum and all that would be required is a message saying, "Unfortunately, due to multiple infringments against the membership agreement, XXX has been banned from the forum." Inevitable discussion may then take place in the GC section.

I completely agree. It would be nice to know if a user was banned, but with minimal information. We don't need to know all the details, just that he or she failed to adhere to rule no. X.

At the discretion of the mods perhaps it may be possible for the banned member to also post a final message to the members on this same thread.

A final message may be nice; although, for some, it may lead to insult rather than simply saying goodbyes. Maybe a "Goodbye" thread would suffice.

 

[Kookamoor]

A final message may be nice; although, for some, it may lead to insult rather than simply saying goodbyes. Maybe a "Goodbye" thread would suffice.

Yes, I thought of that, hence "at the discretion of the mods" so that the message could be approved so as not to insight more trouble or anger.

 

[Peder]

I think a lot of the disussion and unease has been about the fairness of the process. It think that not only should the processs be fair, which it presumably is, but that it must also be seen to be fair, which so far seems to be the question. If the process is seen to be fair, or at least justifiable, then much of the argumentation may well go away. Hence my suggestion that the supporting evidence be presented along with the judgement. Star chambers went out a long time ago did they not?
Peder

 

[Stewart]

On another note, to save me starting a new thread, do we still really need the test forum? It looks ugly.

 

[Kookamoor]

It think that not only should the processs be fair, which it presumably is, but that it must also be seen to be fair, which so far seems to be the question. If the process is seen to be fair, or at least justifiable, then much of the argumentation may well go away. Hence my suggestion that the supporting evidence be presented along with the judgement.

A good point. Transparency is important here so that the judgement may be seen as fair and just. But there must also be a care for the privacy of the individual involved. Just because they have broken the rules does not necessitate a public hanging.

Also keep in mind that this is, essentially, a private forum and that you agree to the rules when you sign up. This entire forum could be closed down any day and there is nothing any of us could do about it. So essentially the mods don't need to justify their reasoning at all. We don't elect them, and they are not paid by us for their services, thus they have no real accountability to the rest of the members. One could say that we are little more than guests in Darren's house where the mods are the ushers.

It is for this reason that I really admire Darren and the mods for asking this question to the forum as a whole so that they may assess what the feeling is among the members for what is 'reasonable' and 'fair'.

 

[Kookamoor]

On another note, to save me starting a new thread, do we still really need the test forum? It looks ugly.

DITTO!!!! Why not just use the 'Preview' button? Is this thread left over from the days before the software had this capability?

 

[lies]

My only worry with a non read-only forum is that it would turn into a slanging match with various people saying things like "this is crap..", but I'll consider it if enough people want it that way.

On the one hand, I agree. That board could indeed turn into a warzone. On the other hand... I think threads will still be opened in General Chat, so why not let people reply in the forum too? Tell the moderators to keep a closer eye on things there?

(Lies, I thought that just "Darren" seemed more friendly and approachable.)

You're right, it does. You're much more cuddly now.

Surely just a mention under 'Site News and Updates' would suffice.

I agree with that too, though I think it'd be nice if that forum weren't read-only either. In fact, maybe "Site News & Updates" and "Website Feedback, Help & Suggestions" could be merged?

 

[lies]

DITTO!!!! Why not just use the 'Preview' button? Is this thread left over from the days before the software had this capability?

TRITTO! (If that's even a word.)

 

[Peder]

Also keep in mind that this is, essentially, a private forum and that you agree to the rules when you sign up..

Kookamoor,
Point well taken!
My experience has been with a forum viewed as being owned by the members, which had transparent accountability and a much wilder range of expression than TBF, and a forum owned by the hosting organization, which had absolutely no acountability, and pretty strict language and behavior rules.
Sounds like it's time I read the rules.

Thanks for the clarification,
Peder

 

[mehastings]

My only worry with a non read-only forum is that it would turn into a slanging match with various people saying things like "this is crap..", but I'll consider it if enough people want it that way.

When I first looked at this thread I thought "right on". We don't need an entire forum dedicated to making nasty comments about banned members or begging for them to be brought back.

However, I read through the rest of the replies and it made me think. Ultimately it is going to happen whether there is a forum for it or not. Keeping it confined to one area would be better. That way only members can view it, and the members that don't want to don't have to. In my opinion, the most important part of a forum like this would be the way the threads are started. I think the initial posts should be very "just the facts". Emotions and anger shouldn't be a part of it. It should also be very clear why the person was banned. That way there's less "this is crap.." and more understanding as to why an action was taken (regardless of a member's popularity).