Banned Member Section...

daguin said:

Can you "feel" it? Can you feel the tension rising?

People are arguing for the "right" to fight it out until they personally are satisfied with the outcome.

I rest my case.

Peace,
dave

Click to expand...

More for the opportunity to fight it out, in the ring, off to the side, to let off the steam and resolve issues (or agree to disagree). Without such pressure relief, you're left with residue from the past with a crust on it like dog shit in the yard. Don't break the crust!

I've said all I am going to say here. I just had to show the other mods what I was talking about.

Peace,
dave

I hope I was helpful in making your point!:beer:

Thank you very much things for posting the info in your 'banned' thread, thats exactly what I was wondering about, no drama, no fights, just free information for the enlighted community.
:thanks:

Well, that's the thing, This banned members list isn't a right, it's a privilege, since other members have asked for it. We'll see how it goes, if people start getting their knickers in a twist over it, it takes 2 seconds to delete.

I'm not going to bother putting all the previous bans on there.

I'm following now, I thought Ranged might have done something just a little too far to push things over the edge, hence the ban but it's just his general attitude I guess.

I think the ban thread is a good idea, but I think it should stay locked and only editable by mods, because otherwise it'll just get filled with pointless discussion that isn't needed in there.

People, I just want to say, you know, can we all get along??!?!? (Rodney King)

lasersbee said:

Since we have had new mods on the Forum... I have seen
non noob members being banned....

I think it would be a good Idea to have an area on the Forum
that would show for any banned member their pedigree...

1) The banned member's User name
2) Date of Ban
3) Duration of ban
4) Reason for ban
5) Who asked for ban

It would let other members see what has been considered a
banning offence..
I was banned at one time and I would have no problem having
this info in a public area...

Let me hear your thoughts...

[EDIT]
Here it is....
http://laserpointerforums.com/f59/banned-members-52115.html


Jerry

Click to expand...

I have a couple concerns with #5 in the OP. Let's examine, for a moment, rangedunits' ban.

Name: rangedunits
Added on: 06-25-2010
Ban Type: Temp - 4 Days
Reason: Beating a dead horse, no meaningful contributions, offensive jokes ...

Click to expand...

For the sake of this discussion, let's have a hypothetical member get banned for the same reasons (just so we're not making an example of rangedunits). Let's also say that Things also placed the member(s) who requested the ban in that thread.

In the case of this hypothetical member, it opens those members up to possible reprisal by the banned member - especially one who was banned for reasons such as "beating a dead horse" and doing "offensive" things. If I knew there was a significant possibility of receiving a steady stream of hate in PM's and in the open forum from both the banned member and their friends (and the ignore function won't let you ignore that member and all subsequent accounts), I wouldn't be likely to voice my concerns to Avery.

This is why corporate whistleblowers often receive protection (at least in the US) under law; no one is going to come forward with concerns about internal behavior if they are completely open to all types of reprisal.

Yeah, there's a lot to be said for transparency. But there's also a lot to be said for allowing people to safely and anonymously voice their concerns.

-Trevor

The thread has already been made and Stickied without that info included

Peace,
dave

daguin said:

The thread has already been made and Stickied without that info included

Peace,
dave

Click to expand...

I know. I wanted to voice my concern, lest that change.

Hopefully, given your tone, it won't.

-Trevor

There are no people (whistle blowers) listed, so I dont understand your point.

Tech_Junkie said:

There are no people (whistle blowers) listed, so I dont understand your point.

Click to expand...

I'm speaking against the suggestion and/or possibility of that occurring. It hasn't, and I wanted to voice my opinion in favor of keeping it that way.

-Trevor

Dude it was only a question. Why are you getting so huffy?

Tech_Junkie said:

Dude it was only a question. Why are you getting so huffy?

Click to expand...

I'm not; came across the wrong way. I'll edit.

-Trevor