Anybody else interested in creating a "banned" area?

[tangoparson]

FWIW. On Tapatalk, if i click on the most recent banee’s name, there is a tiny circle slash to the right of the user name. It is ghosted and really small so it is easy to miss


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[easy rider]

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....

Sorry Cammy, just yanking your chain.

But seriously, I believe reasons for banning should be on a need to know basis. Curiosity isn't a need to know. Just like me being a teacher, consequences can arise if I share personal information about the student.

Pretty much it all boils down to rules violation. Knowing that someone is banned just means they broke the rules. If a person has been warned, that also should be a need to know.

 

[Younggun]

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?

I actually considered that last night and it isn’t hard to change, but it would be an issue for temp bans.

Having to remember to change the tag again after someone returned would be tough since most of us moderate in between everything else in life. Users could fix their own tags after returning, but I’m sure some of hold leave it and end up creating more confusion.

For permabans it might be feasible, but most bans are only for a few days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Sorry Cammy, just yanking your chain.

But seriously, I believe reasons for banning should be on a need to know basis. Curiosity isn't a need to know. Just like me being a teacher, consequences can arise if I share personal information about them.

Pretty much it all boils down to rules violation. Knowing that someone is banned just means they broke the rules. If a person has been warned, that also should be a need to know.

Gotcha.


I'll repeat myself, I am not asking for the reason one is banned.
As a matter of fact I was offered an explanation for an individual being banned a few months ago and declined.

I am only wishing to see a name, and whether it's a permanent ban, or not.

 

[Younggun]

Gotcha.


I'll repeat myself, I am not asking for the reason one is banned.
As a matter of fact I was offered an explanation for an individual being banned a few months ago and declined.

I am only wishing to see a name, and whether it's a permanent ban, or not.

In all honesty, it’s very unlikely you will know if it’s permanent and that is assuming we are able to get an automatic tagging system for banned members.

I’m pretty sure it would take some major hacking to allow the software to realize the difference between a ban running on a timer and one that is permanent. Heck, it’s taking more than we would expect just to get it to recognize banned members as a separate group.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ZX9RCAM]

YG, or somebody, could you please respond to my post #76?

 

[Younggun]

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.

If we are able to get the tags worked out the thread may be dropped since the information will be visible everywhere the banned member has posted.


I’m only one guy and don’t make the final call, but I don’t see the need for both. Just my opinion and I don’t speak for the other mods.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AustinN4]

Sorry Cammy, just yanking your chain.

Cammy? You guys must be getting close.

 

[easy rider]

Cammy? You guys must be getting close.

What we really need is an 'unlike' icon.

 

[AustinN4]

What we really need is an 'unlike' icon.

It's there, but you have to Like it first. Then you can Unlike it.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

If we are able to get the tags worked out the thread may be dropped since the information will be visible everywhere the banned member has posted.


I’m only one guy and don’t make the final call, but I don’t see the need for both. Just my opinion and I don’t speak for the other mods.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you.

 

[easy rider]

It's there, but you have to Like it first. Then you can Unlike it.

That doesn't have the same impact, how about a disdain icon.

 

[Shotgun Jeremy]

- wrong thread


Sent from my VS996 using Tapatalk

 

[deemus]

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

It seems this could be an easy way to do it. Enter their new status under their name. I had that thought a while ago, then saw you post this.

 

[Younggun]

It seems this could be an easy way to do it. Enter their new status under their name. I had that thought a while ago, then saw you post this.

Already suggested and considered.

I actually considered that last night and it isn’t hard to change, but it would be an issue for temp bans.

Having to remember to change the tag again after someone returned would be tough since most of us moderate in between everything else in life. Users could fix their own tags after returning, but I’m sure some of hold leave it and end up creating more confusion.

For permabans it might be feasible, but most bans are only for a few days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Younggun]

We are working on it and may be making some progress. Patience is appreciated as is figured out and things are checked to make sure it doesn’t cause any unforeseen issues with other user groups.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Vaquero]

And I'll screw it up soon enough.
Heh

 

[Dawico]

Y'all can edit user names, correct?

Can you just add (banned) or (temp ban) behind their name?

This would save us TaT users some hassle since we have to click on a user name to see any information.

Just throwing it out there. Not sure if that is fairly easy or not.

 

[birddog]

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.

I know who’s looking from an Infoseek perspective. Assume the worst, you’ll probably be correct.

Anyone here that filling out a standard form/sf89 probably has a good idea who’s looking at their online profiles and activities from a professional POV.

 

[birddog]

Sorry Cammy, just yanking your chain.

But seriously, I believe reasons for banning should be on a need to know basis. Curiosity isn't a need to know. Just like me being a teacher, consequences can arise if I share personal information about the student.

Pretty much it all boils down to rules violation. Knowing that someone is banned just means they broke the rules. If a person has been warned, that also should be a need to know.

I agree. For many reasons. The first being privacy and internet stalking, harassment, professional reqs, and potential liability issues.