Returning Banned Members

[Trevor]

I can think of only a few examples where a banned member returned and didn't get into trouble (and subsequently banned) again.

The system as it stands is fine... so I voted no.

Trevor

 

[Spectre Gadget]

I voted conditionally. Sometimes the punishment 'doesn't fit the crime."

However, if they keep coming back and littering the good forum here with garbage and other inappropriate, unrelated stuff then ban again. Then delete the content they posted.

I cite the crackdown on graffiti in the subways of NYC in the 90's. If the artist's paint is gone almost immediately and no one sees it... it's not art, or appreciated. There's no more motivation, so the graffiti stopped (mostly).

It took a lot of work, also making sure there are people to remove the graffiti. However, it paid off. Unfortunately, I think it may mean the same at the forum.

 

[Jhop]

I voted no. If we want the trolls to disappear or at least thin out, We can't let them keep coming back. If you are too immature to be a respectful person then go back to your reddit spamming or xbox vs playstation forums or whatever other troll haven you came from. :thanks:

 

[AngelG]

They should not be allowed back when they're banned for a good reason.
I'm new here so I don't know any real cases, but heard that somebody had been banned for posting P0*n... He has shown big disrespect to the forum and the members.

 

[CurtisOliver]

Thanks everyone for their input. When I made this poll I knew that for one it would be close call and that there isn't really a wrong approach to this. Well, unless you voted 'yes regardless' that is. The poll was simply made to give everyone a chance to express their opinions on the matter, and see what the collective argument for this problem is.

It was no surprise that no-one voted a straight yes. Who wants a scammer back to continue their 'business'? :thinking: I was expecting a conditional yes, and direct no to be very close, but not as close as it actually was. There was one vote for other, which his reasons were addressed.

So I think the best thing to do is to leave things exactly how they are. Nothing needs to be changed. Everyone has come up with some very valuable points for why some should be allowed to return and vice versa. But for the ease of peace on this forum, it should probably be agreed that anyone who is banned for whatever reason should not be allowed to continue their profile here. The reason for this is simple, if a previously banned member returns it can cause upset to those who disagree or have been directly affected by the members actions. Whereas, if a member is not allowed back it doesn't cause anyone any real problems here. It doesn't stop them making a new profile, but at least any rep or post count built up will be history.

For that reason there is no real reason to continue the poll, but if anyone has anything more points that they believe are worth mentioning. Feel free.
Curtis

 

[Chrisbee]

I think the banning system is fine as is. It's more a matter of how easy it is to sign up (as has already been mentioned).
Considering how many garbage posts show up on here, from either returning banned members, or bot type spam, I'd think it'd be easier for the mods to have to approve new member requests rather then have to continuously delete garbage.
I think that this is the only forum that I belong to that doesn't have some sort of approval system in place.

 

[CurtisOliver]

Yes I agree with you there Chrisbee. That would be a better way. It won't be flawless, but it will reduce the probability a lot more.

 

[Crazlaser]

I'd like to add that if the forum asked for email confirmation before posting, that could possibly prevent people from creating sock accounts, as they would need to create email after email and might get tired of causing trouble.

There is a forum that I used to be active in called the Water Rocket Forum and they had problems with malicious people until they added this feature, which is when it died down.

Just my 0.02$.

 

[diachi]

I'd like to add that if the forum asked for email confirmation before posting, that could possibly prevent people from creating sock accounts, as they would need to create email after email and might get tired of causing trouble.

That may reduce spammers, but if someone wanted to troll there are very easy/low effort ways to get around that. Not very effective in that case IMO.

 

[InfinitusEquitas]

There are several ways to work around the email verification issue. To prevent sock puppets, several steps can be taken;

1. Delayed email verification. Have the email go out 24 hours after the account is made.
2. Require posts to be approved, first 5 or 10, for new members.
3. Offer option to skip the 10 post probation period, and 24 hour delay for email, by donating $1 to the forum.

It would not make it impossible to troll, not at all, but it would make it more difficult. Would make it impossible for typical spammers to work here too because they usually just plaster their crap all over as quickly as possible.

 

[CurtisOliver]

This is good IE. Spammers won't wait, or pay to do their business. Trolls on the other hand, if someone seriously has something against this forum, they won't mind $1 to get there chance on posting their nonsense again. But for most trolls, this would be a put off. It is a step in the right direction IMO.

 

[Down with Umbrella]

BRO made it back? Whoa.
I vote NO. The admin do suspend accounts for bad behavior. If it's habitual you've already had your warning. After a perma ban there should be no return. I like it here at LPF.
:beer:

Edit: having said that it's not to say members that are currently banned have never helped me out. They have. It just sucks to ruin a good thing you know?

 

[icecruncher]

I totally agree!

If a banned member was banned for financially stealing from members here then they should NOT be allowed back until they
have made good with the members they cheated.

If it is a 1st or even 2nd minor banning offence I have no
problems letting them back in.... but only twice.

Jerry

 

[NightExplorer96]

I don't mind letting people back in if it's a minor offense and they prove they want to/can change. If it goes back to the same old, same old, then forget it!

-Alex

 

[94Z28]

I don't mind letting someone unban as said a temp ban could work for minor things "he pissed me off or cursed st me so ban him"

You should hear how my friends talk to each other, sheesh.

A thief, scammer, liar, bullshitter, etc is perm ban and IP banned (ineffective on non-static IP but why not). And any new accounts should be banned if found.

 

[Crazlaser]

This is just an idea. What if as long as the offense didn't relate to stealing/scamming and no permanent damage was done, then there could be a rule where perma banned members could ask for permission to create a new account only after, say two years had passed. If the person really is sincere about the hobby, they would come back and send a request before making an account. This would be through the "contact" link on the site. The mods would discuss this with the administrator and if decided no, they wouldn't be allowed to come back as the same real life identity. If a person did come back, eventually the would be found out if they ever tried to make purchases or the such because veteran sellers could report that the address was one of a previous banned member. Obviously trolls could make new accounts and this wouldn't be to stop them, only members banned for other reasons. One other thing is there could be a thread saying that the member was let back under a different name but kept locked only for admin to add to. There could also be a probationary period where specific members are monitored for probation violations, such as arguing or spamming.

Another 0.02$