I understand the sentiment, but I think it's disingenuous to omit what seems to be pertinent information regarding rule breakers. I guess what you are asking is for a reform similar to what that the master banlist underwent, but more specific?Decay wrote: But wasn't it just alluded to that drama was being brought to the forums? In this case, wouldn't the way to go would be to completely omit that information to prevent people from being confused? Wouldn't it be better to actually separate and completely forget what went on elsewhere, and warn/suspend/moderate/ban STRICTLY on what is presented here?
The problem is what is being said versus what is being seen.
I had the impression you were defending him; disregard it, though it does just reiterate that I have heard similar arguments before from the person I banned. They made many of the same points you did, regarding what I quoted above.Decay wrote:None of this is relevant. What is the point you're trying to make here?
I was referring to the individuals that were banned having personal vendettas.Decay wrote:I never said they were coming from you specifically. I suggested that the bans were far more personal than they should be.
Normally, suspensions are for anything that comes after a user ignores warnings, while bans are reserved for repeat infractions.
Arguably the most 'unreasonable' ban or whatever that I recently did, would probably be Lance.
He has only about 2 posts on the forums, though instigated quite a bit of useless forum drama over the past year or so.
I have been personally contacted by him and a few others, who shall remain nameless, to address various issues and concerns he had, while also dealing with drama he stirred up both on the forums and on IRC.
He and the others have talked to the staff, and have repeatedly been told how to deal with the various issues they had.
He also had a very negative attitude towards the staff, and he had been told to improve, though did not show many signs of improving.
While I will concede that Lance and Slim's recent punishment came later than intended or maybe expected (esp. on Lance's part), the staff had continuously been promised that the situation would improve, but alas they did not.
I'll elaborate a bit on the forums drama:
Basically he was repeatedly told to cut it out, but instead of stopping or cutting back the flamewars seemed to ramp up.
Slim had been involved, though not as close in retrospect (I shortened his ban from 3 months to 1 month right after issuing it), though he did participate in some of the flamewars, and we had talked a few times about addressing the situation better.
Basically, if shit is "going down" on the forums, it's best to report a post or other behavior to the volunteer staff, instead of jumping into it yourself.
Hopefully that makes sense.
I hope this does not sound too vague, but honestly we should be allowed to get rid of repeat troublemakers if the shit they stir is too time consuming to properly clean up each and every time.