Missin U <3 - lamentations for those felled by the SB

sb statscock

protip for tuomas: it would save you valuable typing time if you just c&ped your posts from upthread every time this comes up

― FCK R VWLS (jjjusten), Friday, October 9, 2009 6:06 PM (30 minutes ago)

I asked a simple question. Is it technically possible to answer it?

How easy is it to work out many of LJ's third 51 were also in his first and second? If there are 30-40 people who SB him on sight he's never getting a fresh start.

There isn't a huge overlap, and 50 is high enough that even the most notorious people here can't get banned just for showing up. I think this particular case isn't a great one to generalise from, because the poster's behaviour changed so radically in the middle. If he keeps on like he is and still hits 200 I think that'd be a much more serious thing, but I really don't see that happening.

I guess what I'm trying to say is there's some sorta moral hazard going - people are aware that SBs aren't always permanent

I've been worried about this from the get-go. It's why I was always so against the people saying "SBs should just be a temp ban" because that does make people click it more lightly than they otherwise would. It can't be a ban on the first time out either, because then you don't get any of the benefits of it sending people a message. Need to be clearer that it's a permanent ban, though mods are likely to let people back in the first couple of times, but it will eventually stick.

(Louis is, again, the exception, because of how he changed. I'd be amazed if anybody else got to 153, but if they did, I strongly suspect that'd be it for good for them.)

Tuomas: No.

itd be cool to be able to see what posts u got sbd for

Ok, thanks for answering.

(x-post)

Doesn't clicking "Suggest Ban" give you an explanation of "you've just suggested that this person permanently be banned" etc? (never clicked it, never will, but since the link is ON EVERY POST, you'd almost think it was something quite harmless)

Please be aware that by confirming this action, you are registering your wish to see this user removed from the site. Once the user has 51 such votes from individual users, they will automatically be banned from the site.

I can see how that would lead someone to think it was something quite harmless.

How easy is it to work out many of LJ's third 51 were also in his first and second?

i was thinking when i read this thread earlier - of the people who have been part of banning any poster, how likely are they to have been part of banning someone the other eight or nine times someone's been banned? i'm just asking rhetorically obv, it would be fairly a useless & pedantic waste of mod time to actually work out

itd be cool to be able to see what posts u cankles got sbd for

― ice cr?m, Friday, October 9, 2009 2:42 PM (18 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

clue: ones where he used racist and sexist epithets, and/or made personal attacks upon other posters; posts, particularly, where he combined the two

doesn't seem to have been a huge amount of crossover, thomp, though there is a tiny number of posters who seem to SB everybody (except maybe estela though i guess her day will come) so I guess those guys could have blood on their bans for more than one poster. xxp

Thanks Dan. (I didn't know that happened, I never clicked on that SB)

i fucked that post up.

i meant to write POLL after the crossed out "see"

cankles: a more valuable member of ilx than most

Please be aware that by confirming this action, you are registering your wish to see this user removed from the site. Once the user has 51 such votes from individual users, they will automatically be banned from the site.
I can see how that would lead someone to think it was something quite harmless.

― as strikingly artificial and perfect as a wizard's cap (HI DERE),

sbing is like smoking weed and that warning is like a anti-drug commercial. the warnings seem really scary! until you stop taking them serious cauase you notice that all your friends are doing it and it's kinda fun and nobody seems to be getting hurt and before you know it you're an addict and you would sb your own mother just to get your fix.

thx stet! that's actually the opposite of what i was expecting

whiney you should make that poll but also make a 'which is the best offensive cankles post' poll and see whether the results correlate negatively or positively

i don't know why i have such a fucking hardon for statistics today.

i think mods should let the banned know what posts they got sb-ed over, especially since most people that get 51-ed post a lot, and they could very well have no clue what people objected to (though in some cases they'd be stupid not to realize certain posts are sb-magnets).

If the banned want to share that info with the rest of us, then fine.

xpost
it's the sexy curves in the 0s and 8s

I guess one problem with that is that with certain posts (like an argument w/ somebody) it'd be pretty obvious who that ban came from?

not when more than one poster can click on the SB link for a particular post

right I just meant certain situations, not the majority of them

yeah, pretty sure that when cankles made that "mudflappers" post to Kate, she wasn't the only one to sb him for being totally out of line.

guys demanding a list of posts is kind of going against the month of self reflection you're given to figure this all out!

I think a lot of problems could be solved if mods just had a policy to email sbanners whenever they see a sb that doesn't seem to have an obvious purpose (someone being a dick)

if people knew they might theoretically have to justify their actions, I imagine people would very quickly be shamed out of lolsbs?

I guess that's based on an assumption that most people here are capable of being shamed, which might not be the case...

xp - i thought that was Yom Kippur?

I think a lot of problems could be solved if mods just had a policy to email sbanners whenever they see a sb that doesn't seem to have an obvious purpose

i for one think this would be a highly effective use of their time

well, one would hope that the threat alone would change the way people used sbs pretty quickly

(and so there would be substantially fewer to deal w/)

the mods could actually just have a policy to email people whenever they see they've made an obnoxious post - then people would feel shamed out of being obnoxious

yeah maybe the shame thing isn't a good angle

maybe the mods could crochet "bad" users an SB to wear on their chest at home, around the office, etc

any sb-ed post should automatically generate its own poll thread.

i would sb in order to generate mod email

I'm sure Gandhi is a million times more respected these days than the guy who invented Suggest Ban.

poll please

Not fair, there isn't a million posters on ILX.

Yes there am.

I for one know that I respect Gandhi a lot, but the inventor of Suggest Ban has given me lols that will never end so long as SB continues & Tuomas from Finland still lives. Mohandas K., luv u boo but I have to follow my heart.

if i were to set the Suggest Ban link to "display: none;" in caek2.css (i.e. remove the ability to SB someone for the non-SBing Gandhis), would the mods accept it?

Who do you respect more

I wish I had 10,000 socks

http://www.sockdreams.com/_shop/edit/index.php

possible caek.css enhancement:

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f325/caek/Picture1-15.png

that'd be a pretty good background pattern

I think a lot of problems could be solved if mods just had a policy to email sbanners whenever they see a sb that doesn't seem to have an obvious purpose (someone being a dick)

if people knew they might theoretically have to justify their actions, I imagine people would very quickly be shamed out of lolsbs?

I guess that's based on an assumption that most people here are capable of being shamed, which might not be the case...

― iatee, Friday, October 9, 2009 7:22 PM (1 hour ago)

actually the bigger problem is that it's based on the assumption that lolsbs are common, and they aren't

The killfile extension still works, right? I don't get why people don't just do that instead. "I won't see this person's posts anymore" seems much less intrusive than "I don't want to see this person's posts anymore, and I don't want other people to be able to either."

actually the bigger problem is that it's based on the assumption that lolsbs are common, and they aren't

fair enough