options for the offended 51

anti-SB ppl need to come up with something better than "let the moderators moderate!" (since old-timers know that back when it was just mods making the call, the howling over the moderators not having the right to make choices that impact the community was just as loud, and would be again) as a solution imo

howbout 'let the mods moderate but in a very laissez faire manner where banning is a last resort'? - I mean of the above posters, how many would have been banned on any msg board with traditional moderation? probably...cankles?

imo the sb system has been a pretty big failure and it seems like everyone but the mods is beginning to accept this.

this whole thing is just getting so patronizing. the poor silent majority can't protect itself? mods might let you back after 30 days and maybe even twice but maybe not it depends whether you learned your lesson? if somebody should be banned, they should be banned - if we really decide that 51 anonymous people is the best way to go about that, fine, but at least have consistency about it.

part of the reason there's no consistency is because we've wanted to make it work, and people have seen obvious flaws, so we've been chopping and changing as we go. that's why I'm saying we should leave it running unmeddled for a period till we can work out what's actually useful and unquestionably bust about it.

gd to see history mayne back from the land of monochrome, even if his 'white ribbon' review made me want to SB him

When does Geir get back from his exile in wastes of the icy north?

in the wastes, even

this whole thing is just getting so patronizing. the poor silent majority can't protect itself?

yeah seriously law-of-the-jungle ideology like this is exactly what the SB is great against. the notion that people should either learn to be dicks back to people who're being dicks to them, or in some way develop strategies against hostile, antagonizing posters, is bullshit. but it fact, the silent majority can project itself. by clicking the suggest ban button.

The problem with the silent majority is that they're fucking silent too fucking often.

Happy Thanksgiving!

by clicking the suggest ban button.

e.g. being dicks, anonymously

wait i.e.

I do think that if anyone clicks the SB button more than 10 times or so, a message should come up that says 'Wait - don't you think that you might be the problem here?'.

only if it then gave you an option to sb the system

http://www.p2fe.com/Silent_Majority_Badge_2.jpg

Stick that on your proud member.

But don't post a picture of it to the WDYLL thread.

It's all making sense now...from the proud silent members at www.narlo.org:

"We give inspirational speeches to groups of 50 or more on freedom, liberty, the constitution and property rights. For details contact us by telephone at 1 800 682-7848 or by e-mail at: i✧✧✧@na✧✧✧.o✧✧"

imo the sb system has been a pretty big failure and it seems like everyone but the mods is beginning to accept this.

I disagree pretty strongly with this! Not a mod etc.

get a badge etc

i disagree too

I disagree massively. SB is far from perfect but it's an improvement on unilateral modding imo, and I mean that without disrespect for the mods. As far as I can tell the SB system has made modding the boards a marginally less stressful job than it used to be, which means that reasonable people are more likely to be happy to do the job.

again, no disrespect, but is that the point? to make the mods' jobs easier?

to ban more people more efficiently

power to the people... ilx "proud silent member" avatar please

even if his 'white ribbon' review made me want to SB him

This is the fucking problem. SB'ing because of differing opinions. Engage the review, point out its flaws. Grapple with his taken position. State your own. Only press SB if you think someone is providing noise rather than signal. Critical comment is signal.

I am cool with the SB system because I never, ever think to click the button. It's there, unused, dormant, but its mere presence is placatory for many. Sadly, people rarely engage ideals of tolerance, community or broad-mindedness when they use it. They do so out of a Pavlovian response which dictates that a moment's disaffection ought to equal a lengthy ban.

People of ILX, press that button if and only if someone is directly and wilfully undermining your enjoyment of ILX, and only if they are showing signs of persisting in this behaviour. I know these words will fall on deaf ears, and I know a load of people will possibly SB this post for joeks (because invisible bans upon someone who isn't going to be 51'd ever, ever again are so lol-bringing), but please, try to look at it from the potential bannee's perspective. SB is there for a reason, and a dismally large number of you are misusing it.

hey dumbass he said it "made me want to SB him" not it "made me SB him" so basically he followed your guidelines

(Also, yes I know many SBs are given after someone has inadvertently annoyed a poster a number of times. Each annoyance, when taken in isolation, is trifling. At this juncture, I recommend a killfile or a gritted-teeth toleration. There will be other threads. Better still, let them know openly why they're being annoying, because subsequent persistence will be an SB'able offence under my proposed unofficial guidelines.)

(ha n/a but for many 'want to' becomes 'really does')

(Of course, this gets difficult, if what one poster perceives as intolerable and SB'able is deemed by the annoying poster as perfectly reasonable. Free speech issues are thus implicated and the whole thing gets too much for me to handle...just learn to live with each other kthxbi)

http://www.dropshots.com/photos/275370/20070419/004544.jpg

l-r: kate, lj, history mayne, harbl

why me???

Jesus appears to be sitting on the banks of Lough Swilly there which is a bit of the Bible I wasn't aware of.

xp - because you & history mayne support the sb, and kate is against it - you are on opposite knees of jesus. Also, you said before that you were blond, I think.

does kinda look like me i guess

I'm fine with SB existing also, but what I am hating is the endless endless fucking whinging about it, jesus god on a pushbike.

Trayce the whinging is like the icing on the cake of suggest bans

Haha well thats a better way of looking at it!

anti-SB ppl need to come up with something better than "let the moderators moderate!" (since old-timers know that back when it was just mods making the call, the howling over the moderators not having the right to make choices that impact the community was just as loud, and would be again) as a solution imo

― a full circle lol (J0hn D.), Thursday, November 26, 2009 1:06 PM (6 hours ago)

I was anti-sb back before it was cool to be anti-sb, and there have been many suggestions made on how to modify the system to make it more workable. for instance, a poll is required to finalize somebody's sb ban. that wouldn't have saved deeznuts or gabbneb, but it would've reprieved tuomas and jordan maybe. then you can really claim it's the will of the people, until then I still think it's 51 touchy ppl.

another suggestion made numerous times by diff ppl is to implement something along the lines of a "suggest awes" button to offset sb clicks and help those who in total do more good than harm.

I'd given up engaging in these conversations because the mods are unyielding in their support of the system as it is, guess we all enjoy having the same one over and over.

I'd like the option to review and rescind any SBs I've made as I reckon a couple have been fucking up clicking the bookmark link next to it and okaying it without thinking. Also a few might have been heat of the moment 'fuck this guy' SBs that would look unnecessary and petty in the cold light of day (I'm pretty sure I SBed someone in haste for zinging the dead balloon kid before we knew he wasn't a dead balloon kid but the son of an arsehole).

I know it comes up in big red writing asking you to be really really sure etc but maybe we should be allowed to regret and retract an SB as much as a poster can regret and retract a dickish zing.

i think that would be a great feature. i also think that you should have to accrue more sbs for a second banning to counteract grumps who sb banned posters the instant they return.

^no evidence this actually occurs

geir is unbanned now btw

cold

^no evidence this actually occurs

― electrical audio's sm57 (electricsound), Thursday, November 26, 2009 8:09 PM (1 minute ago)

u sure? how do you explain LJ getting a handful within a day or two of coming back?

my statements were not actually related fwiw

well his opening salvo on returning was not terribly unlikely to go under the radar tbqh

u sure? how do you explain LJ getting a handful within a day or two of coming back?

sbing someone for starting a self-indulgent, word-y poll is cool fyi but zinging someone for making a self-indulgent, word-y poll - u deserve sb

Yes lets start a poll to debate a ban, and then lets start a poll when people dont like the results of the poll to debate the reults of the poll.

This is like the "should ILX be registered only" argt all over again.

FWIW I think SB should be used very sparingly for acts of real aggression and disrution - thats all I've ever used it for - but in order for us to exercise that voice, we have to bear the brunt of others using it more lightheartedly or scattershot.

erm i was joking abt 'banning' nrq for writing a review, for a magazine that has nothing to do w/ this borad, that i didn't happen to agree w/

hahahaha

Kool Aids Man Day

cool aidman???

cool aidsylangston