Anybody else interested in creating a "banned" area?

[FireInTheWire]

Hell ya!!!

 

[Bozz10mm]

I believe this is the only forum I'm on that doesn't have some sort of "Banned, Dishonorably Discharged, In Jail, etc." indicator next to the banee's avatar or name. So yeah, I'm all for it.

 

[benenglish]

I've responded to the other mods, elsewhere, about the nuts and bolts of all this. Here, in the interest of transparency, I'll express my take on the issue based on more general principles.

Personally, I think the point is that you should know, when you look at a post, if the account that posted it is banned. I don't see the need for a central repository for that information.

While it seems like a simple concept, sometimes it's not and it would only create problems for both the mods and the greater TGT community. For example, I can think of cases where this seemingly simple request...

I don’t see the point in making it over complicated for a mod. Just share who and why. Easy reminder to the rest of us. I would hope anyway...

...would be impossible or, at least, inadvisable. Why? Well, let's look at this suggestion:

Maybe a link to the thread that broke the camel's back?

That seems simple, right? It's not.

To illustrate, I'll go back quite a ways to one ban I can remember.

The member had broken a rule, was warned, and continued to break it. A short term ban was in order. I sent him a PM telling him I was going to do it, referencing the Code of Conduct, and expressing my sincere desire for him to continue to be a valued contributor when he returned. He replied to me indicating his acceptance of the situation. He didn't like it but he seemed to understand.

As soon as the ban happened, he went ballistic with the business end, far up the food chain from me. He wanted all the information about where to physically serve legal paperwork because he intended to sue TGT for, well, something. For daring to ban him for a short period, he essentially promised to legally destroy the entire community.

His ban was made permanent with no further warning, despite the fact that I had promised to warmly welcome him back to the forum after a short while. I didn't like turning myself into a liar but I broke my promise to him to welcome him back.

Now, let's examine that case in light of the two easy, simple suggestions that were posted earlier in the thread. Note to Sam7sf and EZ-E - I'm not picking on you. You just happened to provide good suggestions that are more complex than they seem at first glance.

There's no "link to the thread that broke the camel's back" because the ban happened for something that didn't break the rules. After all, there's no rule against suing TGT. There's also no need to "Just share who and why. Easy reminder to the rest of us." because I see no valid reason or easy way to remind everyone on the board "Please don't go bat-shit crazy and try to destroy TGT in court. If you do, we're likely to permanently close your account."

Beyond that case, there are even weirder, off-platform reasons to ban members. Paragraphs detailing the sausage-making involved in moderating a forum would be required to publicly record the who and why for some cases.

I'm even loathe to publicly record certain simple, short, valid reasons. Example? It's possible to ban someone for an egregious expression of racism. I'm not saying we've ever done that but it's possible. If we did that, do we really want to immortalize that fact on a page that Google will index and forever show to the rest of the world? I simply don't want to give anti-gun types an easy place to point and exclaim: "See?!? I told you those gun nuts were all terrible racists!!! They even acknowledge it among themselves!!!"

Ultimately, I think the problem is solved if we could just fix a possible configuration issue so that "Banned" shows up below the avatar of all banned members. That tells everyone there's no need to reply to a post because that user is no longer around. That's the way the former software worked and, when that was the case, no one would have conceived of the need for a public list.

However, I don't know if it's technically possible on this platform. That technical discussion is ongoing elsewhere, with reference to materials provided by the software authors and on forums where mods, admins, and the like meet to discuss such software-specific esoterica.

As I advised a friend, please be patient. There's a valid reason to want a change to the way the board shows this information and we're earnestly exploring the feasibility of providing that information in different ways. Users need to know when other accounts are banned. I agree with that. If the only way to get that done is by publishing a list in a publicly visible thread, I'll support that. For now, though, I'm advocating for my viewpoint that there's probably a better way.

I feel sure something will change. I'm just not sure exactly how or when.

 

[SQLGeek]

Came across this in an older thread that was recently bumped.

It seems there's some way to do it in the old software that carried over into the new.

Here's the post

https://www.texasguntalk.com/thread...-port-aransas-beach.76368/page-2#post-1471559

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Ben, as as FYI, EZ-E's request for the thread which "broke the camels back" was a request for the reason which I started this thread.

I pm'd him last night to answer his question.

Thanks for all ya'll are doing.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Came across this in an older thread that was recently bumped.

It seems there's some way to do it in the old software that carried over into the new.

View attachment 167789

Here's the post

https://www.texasguntalk.com/thread...-port-aransas-beach.76368/page-2#post-1471559

Interesting.

 

[benenglish]

Came across this...

Noted and stirred into the tech/admin discussion.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Of course that doesn't inform us that someone has been banned unless we happen across their name in a thread they posted in.

As an example, the "elk/deer gun" thread, he was banned, but people who already posted to the thread would not know he had been banned.

New posters, who see the OP, of course would see that he had been banned .

 

[pronstar]

I’m sure this info lives on a spreadsheet somewhere


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[diesel1959]

I guess I get that, but, y'all need to have some way of knowing you're responding to a ghost.

On some other boards, when a person gets banned, it shows under their avatar & username. So when you look at a post, you can actually see that the poster has been banned.

EDIT: I see I am late to the game and this particular suggestion. Carry on!

 

[Sam7sf]

Ben’s giant post has a point that I want to talk about. The things we talk about get indexed by google. Two immediate thoughts:

1, I don’t use social media or give my employers any information that’s easy to look me up or what my hobbies are. Most of you know I’m a jokester, but hopefully know too I’m polite. I’m not perfect but you never know who’s looking. So to the rest of you, be careful what you share outside of tgt.

2, speaking of you never know who’s looking, we can’t have fuel for the anti’s. It’s messed up and I hate walking on eggshells but he’s got a valid point.

 

[benenglish]

Ben’s giant post...

Be thankful I've gotten out of the habit of posting essays so long they hit the word limit and have to be split into multiple (as in "sometimes more than two") posts.

 

[karlac]

I believe this is the only forum I'm on that doesn't have some sort of "Banned, Dishonorably Discharged, In Jail, etc." indicator next to the banee's avatar or name. So yeah, I'm all for it.

If the software can say "Lifetime Member", etc. in a text box under the avatar, it should be an easy hack to say "Banned" liked the old software did.

That alone was sufficient to make saints out of most sinners ...

 

[benenglish]

If the software can say "Lifetime Member", etc. in a text box under the avatar, it should be an easy hack to say "Banned" liked the old software did.

That alone was sufficient to make saints out of most sinners ...

The official documentation for the forum software is very clear about being designed, by default, to never show registered users that another user has been subjected to any sort of discipline.

Yeah, I find that really odd, too, but it's right there in the documentation. There appear to be workarounds but they're pretty ugly. Configuration, testing, and implementation might take a while. They might, also, be judged to be sufficiently nonstandard that maintenance becomes an issue; there are user group priorities that could get complicated.

I really don't know.

I do know that the folks who are supposed to look at this stuff have confirmed that they are doing exactly that.

 

[Big Dipper]

Perhaps this would create too much work for the mods, but if one can create one’s own “custom title” could that be changed to “banned” when the malefactor is banned by a mod?

 

[ZX9RCAM]

I don't want to appear pushy, but just hoping that my idea for a thread hasn't been dropped.
I actually would still request it be done even if the mods are able to work out something in the screen name area.

 

[karlac]

The official documentation for the forum software is very clear about being designed, by default, to never show registered users that another user has been subjected to any sort of discipline.

Sounds like it was designed by liberals in silicon valley ...

 

[ZX9RCAM]

I just noticed a big red "banned" under our latest scammer.
Thanks guys!


ETA: But please see post #76.

 

[easy rider]

Is Cammy trying to get me banned again? And is this the conspiracy thread?

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Is Cammy trying to get me banned again? And is this the conspiracy thread?

Not sure what you are talking about.

Although, confusion in this thread isn't helping any.
I know, can't believe I said it, lol....