Returning Banned Members

[NightExplorer96]

Alex, stop changing your avatar to more food.

Fooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooood :wave::wave::wave:

-Alex

 

[CurtisOliver]

Ha, I just had a cheeseburger for real. Eat that. :na:

 

[Jhop]

Fooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooood :wave::wave::wave:

-Alex

:crackup::crackup::crackup::crackup:

:beer:

 

[NightExplorer96]

Now with fries!

-Alex

 

[Crazlaser]

Hap you're making me hungry. I need to go to five guys now. op::takeit::drunk:

 

[dden4012]

Needs more bacon ...mmmm bacon.

 

[Cyparagon]

What are you people even doing? You don't find this the least bit embarrassing?

 

[Alaskan]

We might get banned for talking bacon cheese burger here folks, , better to eat them

 

[trencheel303]

What about implementing a janitor or "sub-moderator" type of system where trusted members (i.e. vets, users that have been active for a certain period of time, users that have a reputation above a certain level, etc.) are granted special privileges?

This has less to do with RBMs than it does trolls, but I think it is still relevant.

I think a system like this would work well:

Users with sub-mod privileges would be able to flag a post or user for moderator approval. While pending approval, the posts (or all posts by a certain user in the event that a user is flagged) would be hidden from the rest of the forum. If the post or user was deemed acceptable by a moderator, it would re-appear on the forum. If it was deemed unacceptable, it could be deleted.

Users that abused such privileges could have them revoked, and any damage a rogue sub-mod could create could be reverted within minutes. Users that showed that they could be trusted with said privileges could also possibly be upgraded to moderator, or be given privileges half-way between sub-mod and mod, though that may be unnecessary.

The only reason I am suggesting such a program is to discourage trolling (of which there has been an increase recently). I think that if a troll were to have their post removed before anyone could even reply, it would greatly reduce their willingness to expend effort doing so. I think our mods do a great job, but they are only human, and can only be on the forum performing moderator duty every so often. With lots of "mods" patrolling the forum, trolls would probably find something better to do.

That expands on my idea a little, but it could be a clusterfuck if it went even a bit wrong.

I think the key thing here is as already discussed by Ped in a recent reply, the answer to this is in the forum software (lots of other forums do it) but for whatever reason, management won't implement them. Quite why they won't do anything about it is beyond me, but it isn't for us to decide and it's become clear to me that it won't change. Really then, discussing it is a moot point and probably of annoyance to some people. Best just let the mods do what they do and sit back and relax.

 

[Crazlaser]

What are you people even doing? You don't find this the least bit embarrassing?

Read my mind

 

[InfinitusEquitas]

They are following tradition. Taking a thread that's not going anywhere completely off topic with inoffensive humor.

I'm a bit dissapointed there are no gifs though.

 

[NightExplorer96]

We're just having a little fun yes :yh:

-Alex

 

[Alaskan]

I think I know why some controls aren't implemented, if they were there would be less activity and clicks, not a complaint, but I think that is more important for reasons we don't fully see as users of the forum. I will say this, if more people supported the forum with donations, we probably could have tighter controls. I've noticed when I type something here, that I am interested in some thing or another, sometimes I get links to that very same item on ebay or something. Makes me wonder if the forum is partially supported by some kind of agreement which tracks us, or maybe that has nothing to do with the forum except google is tracking me.

 

[joeyss]

IMO they should be allowed to return except for scammers and people that just spammed. Make a 6 month waiting period and if they come back before that ban them. If they come back after the 6 months and they don't break the rules let them stay , but make suspensions harsher and warn them 3 strikes for major rule breaking and they're out for good. This way gimmick posters won't put any effort and won't comeback most of the time.

It's not perfect but no system will be.

 

[Accutronitis]

Can somebody explain what the rep power counting is all about and why it is worth doing or not doing ?

 

[Razako]

Can somebody explain what the rep power counting is all about and why it is worth doing or not doing ?

For every 100 rep, you have 1 rep power. IE you could give somebody 3 rep at the moment. I think when taking away rep it only takes away half as much. The rep system is mostly just a way of letting the forum 'self police'. Good contributing members will end up high into the green bars, while trolls, scammers and general trouble makers will go red.