On bans and power dynamics (1 Viewer)

[Faceplant]

In the end, it has to be a simple process. This is not exactly a financially lucrative endeavor, me thinks, but rather a labor of love for Matt and the mods, so some big elaborate system of peer review is going to be too cumbersome for what the job pays. I also feel that the ban hammer descends too quickly sometimes, but, overall, the way it is set up now is the easiest way to do things, and it has to be easy or it will fail. Leave as is (but please cut me some slack when I become overly annoying, which is whenever I’m breathing ). I do miss Juan, maybe his meds weren’t adjusted properly for a short period of time.

 

[coltsfoot]

I really like everything that people are saying and Matt, think it comes down to what ur comfortable with. Beyond the my house my rules stuff, i just want echo that u gotta feel appreciated and not feel like ur opinion is somehow less valuable than the everyone elses when ur the one pouring ur life into stp.

im curious about the 2/3 vote thing. could be cool to explore. in the end all the staff are human and can lose their cool/be biased at times and a vote or jury or whatever would probably help balance things out a little bit.

I wonder if it would be better to have people who've had an account for like at least a year or more and have a certain number of posts to make sure ur getting people who are actually invested in the community and have some context for whatever the conflict is. or maybe that brings more possibility for bias?

idk thanks for considering all this. anarchism is a tension, not a realization

 

[Coywolf]

Late to the freakin' party...as usual.

If you have any actual ideas on how to have a website like stp function without some type of "hey can some of yall not turn everything into a 4chan thread" type of moderation I'm all ears. I really am. I cant speak for anyone besides myself but of course I would enjoy not having to tell grown adults to not be shitty to each other, or to attempt to prey on young or vulnerable people, or to not spew their racist bullshit on here because that's just not cool. Unfortunately the world (and more importantly in this case the internet) doesnt work like that.

^For real

After being here for a few years, and since becoming a mod, I have had the pleasure of witnessing how awful people can actually be. That isint discounting the times I've seen the best in people on here, I'm just saying that we get some reall winners on this site sometimes.

I think there's certain scenarios where it's cut and dry, blatant racist/homophobic shit. I don't think we need a jury beyond the one we already have in the staff to sit down and decide what to do on those situations. But I'd like the community to have more control over the less cut and dry bans.

This. If it is a ban having to do with the issues above, I'm guessing most users agree with it. But then again we get those threads like the one with the dude and the swastica tattoo, and some users were not too happy about that.

what if we put a poll on each 'den of the banned' thread? just a simple, 'seems fair' vs 'seems unfair' vote?

I think this is, probably, the best way to go about this. The Den of the Banned was created (I believe) as a response to these very concerns, and adding that poll to the DotB thread would be a great way to gauge the majority opinion of users on our actions.

One thing to add to that, would be only allowing active/established members on StP to vote in those polls, but I have NO idea what that would look like from the web developing side, or of it is even possible.

I say this for obvious reasons.

 

[Older Than Dirt]

I missed Matt's suggestion of a poll on each ban until @Coywolf 's post, and i think this is a very good idea.

I haven't said anything about banning Juan. i miss the dude, he was a nice guy. I think he got kinda manic for a while, but fuck, it's the plague times- we're all a little cuckoo. I think he should be let back in.

And while i understand that having your phone get a lot of notifications could be annoying, it seems like Juan got banned for apologizing too much and pissing you (Matt) off. You could always put your phone on silent, or turn off notifications, when you want to sleep.

But the idea of getting community feedback on bans seems worth doing.

 

[Deleted member 125]

This thread reminds me alot of all the flak staff got when we banned creature. Just cause someone is yer friend does not make them immune to the consequences of repeatedly being a turd on here. That would kinda turn banning or not banning people into a popularity contest which from what I can tell everyone for the most part agrees is a shit idea.

, it seems like Juan got banned for apologizing too much and pissing you (Matt) off.

Juan got banned after being asked multiple times to not post spammy comments on every single thread. His own buddy even said he got bored with stp so he started pushing buttons on purpose. He was trolling and people (not just staff, that's important to point out here) got sick of it. If folks really wanna talk to him I'm quite sure it would not be difficult to get his number from other users who commented about knowing him personally. It would be that easy yea? I would eat my hat if he just went ghost or if stp was the only place on the internet where he has a presence.

I'm reading alot of "I want it better" and "here's my suggestion that I understand can't work but still..." which is fine, it's great this is being discussed.

I also think theres some people on stp who will just argue endlessly and say it ain't good enough and needs to change but also dont even know what they want or how it could even be achieved. But i mean, what do I know?

 

[Eng JR Lupo RV323]

I just think we should have been a little more forgiving, during these strange covid19 times. He wasn't flaming anyone, he wasn't being a bigot, he wasn't intentionally doing anything wrong IMO. I think he's just been in the house way more than usual, probably has some pretty crazy stresses right now as well. Yeah it got out of hand but none of it felt malicious. I've been reading Jaun's posts for years and he's always been quite funny, and never this way at all. How can we ignore years of the guy being pretty fucking even keel all around and then once covid19 hits he's drastically different? Idk, I think it's fucked up.

 

[Older Than Dirt]

Juan got banned after being asked multiple times to not post spammy comments on every single thread.

That's not why Juan was banned, not according to Matt's OP in the "den of the banned" thread about banning Juan. Matt says he banned him for posting many status updates that tagged Matt in the middle of the night:

it finally ended with him posting a tirade of useless shit on his profile. now, i generally let people post whatever they want on their profiles, it's their profile. but, if it starts spamming up the entire list of 'recent status updates' and you tag me in it at 3 fucking am at night [...] now, i was already having a hard time sleeping that night, and my phone blowing up every few minutes over this was not helping.

All of those status updates (see screenshot Matt posted) were abjectly apologizing for being spammy, and begging not to be banned, and saying how much he valued being a member of this community.

So Juan was not banned for the zillions of pointless manic posts, but was, according to Matt, banned for pissing off Matt by "blowing up" Matt's phone at 3 am apologizing for spamming.

Second point: You are replying to my post, agreeing with Coywolf liking Matt's suggestion of a poll on each ban, and you say that

I also think theres some people on stp who will just argue endlessly and say it ain't good enough and needs to change but also dont even know what they want or how it could even be achieved.

Maybe. But you can't be talking about me here, since i am supporting a specific suggestion initiated by the head of the mod team, and supported by at least one other mod. That isn't mere carping and complaining.

I also have to question this statement- a poll or any community input into bans would

turn banning or not banning people into a popularity contest which from what I can tell everyone for the most part agrees is a shit idea.

Well, at least Matt , and Coywolf, and I, think polling bans is worth trying, so that's at least three voices here who don't think democracy and community voice are "a shit idea".

 

[Matt Derrick]

All of those status updates (see screenshot Matt posted) were abjectly apologizing for being spammy, and begging not to be banned, and saying how much he valued being a member of this community.

So Juan was not banned for the zillions of pointless manic posts, but was, according to Matt, banned for pissing off Matt by "blowing up" Matt's phone at 3 am apologizing for spamming.

Second point: You are replying to my post, agreeing with Coywolf liking Matt's suggestion of a poll on each ban, and you say that

you specifically cut off the part where i mention what led up to his ban, which was literally 400 posts in 2 weeks. therefore you are really representing my actions out of context, which is pretty unfair. i also love that i was going pretty far out of my way to NOT issue a warning and now that's being used against me here.

context, as stated in the den of the banned thread:

So I finally had to remove @Juan Derlust from the forums last week with a permanent ban. This was the culmination of a few weeks of utter nonsense posting, that I was being pretty kind about, but it got to the level where this user was posting SO often, along with a few others, that he was literally replying to his own posts over and over, in some kind of bizarre diarrhea of the mouth, making some threads pages long of nonsense posts, one or two word responses, and responses to his own responses that every other user in the community had to page through to get to anything useful.

this user made 400+ posts in the first two weeks of april alone, and as far as I can tell, none of it was useful or related to any of the subjects of this message board. on top of that, they were literally spending 8+ hours a day on the website, which is something not even I do. I mean, sure, StP is great, but if you're on here every day, all day, seven days a week, making nearly 30 posts a day, you seriously need to get a fucking life.

i went pretty far out of my way to NOT issue a warning, and instead sent a PM asking this person to stop doing that. they complied for the time being and it seemed worked out. unfortunately, for whatever reason, they just could not stop posting, and it finally ended with him posting a tirade of useless shit on his profile. now, i generally let people post whatever they want on their profiles, it's their profile. but, if it starts spamming up the entire list of 'recent status updates' and you tag me in it at 3 fucking am at night, I'm gonna get a little sour about it:

I'd appreciate it if you didn't warp my words out of context for the sake of disagreement.

 

[Older Than Dirt]

I am not "warping your words", i am literally quoting the reasons you gave for banning him.

Obviously the many manic and pretty pointless posts were what got him in hot water, but, ACCORDING TO YOU, why he was actually banned was the many status updates at 3 am one morning, all of them apologizing for spamming.

 

[Matt Derrick]

I just think we should have been a little more forgiving, during these strange covid19 times. He wasn't flaming anyone, he wasn't being a bigot, he wasn't intentionally doing anything wrong IMO. I think he's just been in the house way more than usual, probably has some pretty crazy stresses right now as well. Yeah it got out of hand but none of it felt malicious. I've been reading Jaun's posts for years and he's always been quite funny, and never this way at all. How can we ignore years of the guy being pretty fucking even keel all around and then once covid19 hits he's drastically different? Idk, I think it's fucked up.

there will never be any way that 400 nonsense posts in two weeks will not be considered spam here. i don't care what 'mental state' you're in, he can deal with it somewhere else, he's an adult, it's not our job to let him verbally vomit all over StP for his own gratification.

sorry, not trying to be a jerk here, i just need to go get my morning caffeine enema

 

[Matt Derrick]

I am not "warping your words", i am literally quoting the reasons you gave for banning him.

Obviously the many manic and pretty pointless posts were what got him in hot water, but, ACCORDING TO YOU, why he was actually banned was the many status updates at 3 am one morning, all of them apologizing for spamming.

dude, no, please re-read the thread. there was more than one reason he got banned, the 3am thing was just the culmination of it. you're vastly mis-interpreting what i wrote.

in addition, i wrote MORE THAN ONCE "what do you want" and "what do you want from me" in which he refused to answer and kept going on his tyrades. why i have to justify someone keeping me up at night after directly refusing to answer my questions of why he is doing so is beyond me.

 

[Matt Derrick]

I am not "warping your words", i am literally quoting the reasons you gave for banning him.

you are literally quoting my words out of context in order to fit your opinion of what happened.

 

[Older Than Dirt]

dude, no, please re-read the thread. there was more than one reason he got banned, the 3am thing was just the culmination of it. you're vastly mis-interpreting what i wrote.

I did reread it this morning- how could i use the quote function if i hadn't?

And i don't think i have said that the only reason he got banned was the apologies at 3am, or that you can fairly say i've ignored the context of his pointless posting for a couple weeks: my first post in this thread mentioned Juan was getting "kinda manic", my second post said he was being "spammy" and mentioned his "zillions of pointless manic posts", my third post mentioned "many manic and pretty pointless posts". That's all the posts i've made about the Juan ban (before this one). So actually i specifically mentioned, in each post here, the context you say i'm leaving out.

And i am not interpreting or mis-interpreting what you said, i am quoting it- they are your words, not mine.

 

[Older Than Dirt]

The point i was actually trying to make is: i support Matt's suggestion that Coywolf mentioned of doing a poll on banning folks.

Not interesting in further discussing what Juan was banned for. Anyone who cares can read for themselves and make up their own mind.

 

[Matt Derrick]

I did reread it this morning- how could i use the quote function if i hadn't?

And i don't think i have said that the only reason he got banned was the apologies at 3am, or that you can fairly say i've ignored the context of his pointless posting for a couple weeks: my first post in this thread mentioned Juan was getting "kinda manic", my second post said he was being "spammy" and mentioned his "zillions of pointless manic posts", my third post mentioned "many manic and pretty pointless posts". That's all the posts i've made about the Juan ban (before this one). So actually i specifically mentioned, in each post here, the context you say i'm leaving out.

And i am not interpreting or mis-interpreting what you said, i am quoting it- they are your words, not mine.

you know, you don't have to rules lawyer everything. i know it was your job for a while or whatever, but now you're just backpedaling and nit-picking.

The point i was actually trying to make is: i support Matt's suggestion that Coywolf mentioned of doing a poll on banning folks.

great. heard ya loud and clear. opinion noted.

 

[Eng JR Lupo RV323]

Well, at least Matt , and Coywolf, and I, think polling bans is worth trying, so that's at least three voices here who don't think democracy and community voice are "a shit idea".

Yeah put me down as a late entry on this "new idea". I too think polling bans is worth trying.

Are all bans created equal? | Squat the Planet

Right now as far as I see, all bans seem to be permanent. Should there maybe be a discussion on the possibility of ban lengths tailored to the offense? Could throw out week long bans to send a message to people who are spamming too hard or something and save permanent bans for like, I dunno...

squattheplanet.com

 

[Coywolf]

I just think we should have been a little more forgiving, during these strange covid19 times. He wasn't flaming anyone, he wasn't being a bigot, he wasn't intentionally doing anything wrong IMO. I think he's just been in the house way more than usual, probably has some pretty crazy stresses right now as well. Yeah it got out of hand but none of it felt malicious. I've been reading Jaun's posts for years and he's always been quite funny, and never this way at all. How can we ignore years of the guy being pretty fucking even keel all around and then once covid19 hits he's drastically different? Idk, I think it's fucked up.

I agree with you, but that is what the whole poll would be for.

Also, for christ sake @Older Than Dirt can we not turn this thread into nitpicking. It's quite annoying. Please everyone stay on topic.

 

[Older Than Dirt]

I am sorry that it is considered "nit-picking" and "rules-lawyering", and somehow bad/wrong/disruptive, to quote the reason that Matt gave for banning Juan.

And i already said in my last post "Not interesting in further discussing what Juan was banned for. Anyone who cares can read for themselves and make up their own mind." So pretty clear that i have no interest in discussing Juan's ban more.

I did not post in this thread to argue about why Juan got banned. I wouldn't bother, because experience has shown that would be a waste of time.

I just mentioned it in passing in posting to support Matt's idea of a poll around each ban. I should have expected the torrent of defensive replies, but i honestly didn't. That was naive and foolish of me. I probably should have ignored them when they came.

 

[Deleted member 125]

I am sorry that it is considered "nit-picking" and "rules-lawyering", and somehow bad/wrong/disruptive, to quote the reason that Matt gave for banning Juan.

And i already said in my last post "Not interesting in further discussing what Juan was banned for. Anyone who cares can read for themselves and make up their own mind." So pretty clear that i have no interest in discussing Juan's ban more.

I did not post in this thread to argue about why Juan got banned. I wouldn't bother, because experience has shown that would be a waste of time.

I just mentioned it in passing in posting to support Matt's idea of a poll around each ban. I should have expected the torrent of defensive replies, but i honestly didn't. That was naive and foolish of me. I probably should have ignored them when they came.

Heard. Thank you for the opinion.

 

[roughdraft]

can we not turn this thread into nitpicking. It's quite annoying. Please everyone stay on topic.

isn't the topic "bans and power dynamics"?