options for the offended 51

crut otm

I'd like the option to review and rescind any SBs I've made

― nearly 50 in vagina years (onimo), Thursday, November 26, 2009 7:59 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

this is a super good idea - itd be cool to see who youve sbd in a collect them all sort of way

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

you're right, clearly it's pointless to debate bans

no offense dude and i sympathize w/ your position but that's never gonna happen

no offense taken, whether that idea is good or bad is besides the point

the problem is having any constructive discussion about how to modify the current system is near impossible

yeah whatever you say

i think the two things i suggested upthread are pretty reasonable and doable

here's another idea: the receiver of an sb can see how many sb's a particular post has earned them, might help folks understand their problem areas

^i would be for this fwiw

the problem is having any constructive discussion about how to modify the current system is near impossible

― 鬼の手 (Edward III), Friday, November 27, 2009 12:13 AM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark

Suggest Ban Permalink

yeah whatever you say

― electrical audio's sm57 (electricsound), Friday, November 27, 2009 12:17 AM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark

I'd love to be proven wrong

but ppl make suggestions, we debate them, the mods say nothing's changing, more debate, thread gets locked, rinse & repeat

the changes that have been made to SB since it first came in (seeing which post it related to & who did it, deciding to expire SBs after 6 months) were borne out of these discussions

also there's nothing impossible about the discussions - people can and do discuss it til they have blue faces but the argument "SB sucks turn it off now" is going to continue to be ignored.

why?

because it's not going to be turned off

oh okay, because you said so

sure, if that makes you feel better

I mean the idea that we shouldn't even talk about the *theoretical idea* of one day not having the sb system is pretty silly.

this is not some normal msg board feature that can be taken for granted, it's a pretty bizarre way of getting things done and not universally considered a success...cept apparently by the mods.

this is not some normal msg board feature that can be taken for granted,

lool

of the two other boards i spend a reasonable amount of time on, one bans you temporarily after three infractions (which you could equate to SBs) and permanently after three temp bans. the other only requires a mod to agree with one person complaining. yeah, ilx's way of doing it perhaps isn't normal, in fact it gives a whole bunch more leeway afaics

Yeah I was gonna say - almost every other forum I'm on has "thumbs down" that knocks your posts offline, or bans you instantly without discussion if you break certain (very abitrary and weird) rules, or bans you after 3 strikes, or... etc etc etc. This is far and away - even with SB - the most lenient board I have ever been on.

Some forums ban you for reviving old threads!

MOST DISGUSTING SAVAGES

I suppose the only other way this might work more to peoples liking - and people can tell me this is stupid if they like - is to have a more specific ban-request system, whereby you lodge a complaint against a poster of specific forum rulebreaking.

Ie: you click sb and a page comes up that has options like "image flooding", "racism", "personal abuse", "consistent aggresive behaviour" or whatever. Mods review and decide to ban based on this. I dunno though. Its probably way too much work.

the changes that have been made to SB since it first came in (seeing which post it related to & who did it, deciding to expire SBs after 6 months) were borne out of these discussions

that's good to hear, but I've also been expecting this thread to get locked any minute now. it can't come as a surprise to you that ppl have the perception, wrong or not, of ilx as an environment that's not conducive to constructive criticism of the sb system.

of the two other boards i spend a reasonable amount of time on, one bans you temporarily after three infractions (which you could equate to SBs) and permanently after three temp bans. the other only requires a mod to agree with one person complaining. yeah, ilx's way of doing it perhaps isn't normal, in fact it gives a whole bunch more leeway afaics

― electrical audio's sm57 (electricsound), Friday, November 27, 2009 12:59 AM (9 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Yeah I was gonna say - almost every other forum I'm on has "thumbs down" that knocks your posts offline, or bans you instantly without discussion if you break certain (very abitrary and weird) rules, or bans you after 3 strikes, or... etc etc etc. This is far and away - even with SB - the most lenient board I have ever been on.

― hulk would smash (Trayce), Friday, November 27, 2009 1:04 AM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

sbd u guys for reading other bords

so glad i don't post to other boards

i love constructive criticism! i (personally) don't like demands and ultimatums, and speaking for myself i ignore that sort of stuff completely. i think a few points raised have been worth considering..

one thing that strikes me out of all these discussions is that sometimes it seems like we're being told that the enjoyment of the board is taken away because one (or two) poster(s) are currently banned. which doesn't say much for all the people who aren't banned, and makes me feel like saying go and start your own board with all this banned guys. i might be projecting here tho

i gotta say my tolerance for trolling here has gone way up since spending time on other boards

I like Trayce's suggestion. It would give the sb'd a little (perhaps not credible) context for their ban, and could help the mods also. I agree that it's reasonable for people to sb thread bullies. I'm less cool with people sb'ing people for being annoying, though I understand the temptation, having given into the temptation a few times in the early days of sb. I think the line between annoying and bullying is pretty clear.

xxp naw man it' more like--here's a great example--jordan is an awesome and key poster on ilnfl and i love hoops, both of which are in full swing these days (and both of which, esp. ilh, are pretty small groups). so a month without jordan is actually really lame. the first couple weeks of the f2k thread surely could have been improved if whiney was here to engage with ppl talking about the thing he was authoring!

like if you have a big party and one of your best friends can't make it, you can still have a good time but there's nothing wrong w/saying damn this would be better if my friend were here.

sbd u guys for reading other bords

lolll

I think the line between annoying and bullying is pretty clear.

I don't! like, I don't think it would take very long to pull up a buncha posts by mods that would classify as pretty rude and bullyish towards someone.

this site is not for thin-skinned people and I really don't see the sb system having changed that - if anything, it's just a different type of bullying.

This is far and away - even with SB - the most lenient board I have ever been on.

and a big part of the appeal / why the site is how it is

I propose a new interpretation of SB: Silent Ban!

The banned poster is not told, he/she can participate in everything as usual, but his posts/threads are only visible to himself for a week.

Guys?

can't imagine what this site would be like if a bunch of people just seemed to be talking to themselves sometimes

lol @ Stan

I like Trayce's idea a lot btw.

I think the problem of having a classified list of SB motives is that you'd probably need to end up having an "Other" option, which would negate the point of having yr classified list.

I think some kind of shorter time scale for the SBs to wear off might be helpful, the system would then target against bravura acts of dickery rather than longer term irritation. But then longer term irritation seems like a valid SB reason too tbh.

I like the idea that people could rescind their own SBs from weeks back. I would almost certainly make use of that feature and again it would give you a chance to come round to a poster who's annoyed you in the past but who you later get a better understanding of. This seems equivalent to the Suggest Awes idea to me except more elegant and more in keeping with restorative justice. Not sure how much of a pig it would be to code tho.

Anyway thanx for your continuing endeavours.

Thanks :) I guess what I was thinking is that the system, should it stay (and clearly it isnt going anywhere), should perhaps be a little more disciplined. What are we asking for bans to apply to? I think we mostly agree its things like image floods, vicious abuse, assholism... it does get into grey areas of course, but if bans apply to specific things, people can request them on that basis. It wont stop people from clicking "ban because theyre being abusive" on someone they just dont like, but hey, people are people.

argh nabiscoxpost

I do also like the "vote back up" idea. Many forums have a thumbs up and down thing (look at youtube).

Thing is Trayce that if you make people give dishonest reasons for why they've clicked the button then you're not really learning anything from the process.

Well no thats not the idea. The idea is, there are only very specific reasons to want a ban.

Other forums do this simply by having hard and fast rules by which mods will go "ok GTFO" if you break them. Pretty simple, but I know it goes against the whole ILX ethos, so. I dunno.

The argument against sb still seems to be, for the majority of people, "I personally wouldn't have banned x poster".

That's a pretty lame argument.

Everyone that's been sbanned so far has a pretty good idea why, and as someone said upthread it can be traced back to behaviour that was obviously bugging other posters and easily changeable if the bannee so wished.

Most of the posters that were banned, I'd have preferred not to have been, but it wasn't a mystery when they were or anything.

Also- FTR- I've used the SB button. Not a crazy amount of times, but let's be real here people. Everyone against the system on some idealogical level, you've never used it, right?

Right?

As Ive said before I have used it maybe... once or twice. Dom was one. I'm not averse to saying so. The other if there was one, im not sure.

Heck ive got 11 sbs myself at last count and personally I dont know why, but at the same time I'm not indignant *shrug*

I think it would be difficult to enforce reasons for wanting a ban. You'd end up with regular debates over whether a particular post broke the rules - more so than now I'd guess - or SB would end up being something that we already have a facility for: complaining to mods about specific infractions of existing rules.

I understand people are concerned about frivolous or dickish uses of the SB button but when it comes right down to it every poster might well have a different definition of what constitutes frivolous or dickish, the same as people have very different ideas of what constitutes a SBannable post. I would be very wary of coming to conclusions about what "most" posters want SB to be for.

I'm still confused as to why mods are taking flack for this- If people are being frivolous or dickish in their use of the function, then that's a totally separate issue, and who would get to decide if that was the case anyway?

Precisely. I think I know why mods are taking the flack for it tho.

Mods will always cop flack for doing what they do, its pretty simple.

SB was kind of "tut tut it's a shame" when it was the pantomime villains that were getting banned but once much-loved monomaniacs and bores started getting the old 51 it became the greatest human rights outrage in history.

I have just about come around to the idea of SBs in principle, since the mods seem to find it useful. But imo, the bar is being set too low, and too may people are getting SBed. (I realise there's a leap in that sentence, which I can spell out if you want, but I think everyone is bored of that.) So basically, I think we should either increase 51 to 77, reduce 6 months to 3 or 4, or both. Peace.

xp lololo

Pretty sure I've never ever used the SB. I kind of hope that if someone pissed me off all that much, then I'd have the guts to let them know directly. I respect people that do this in a tactful, sensitive way. I do recognise that this approach doesn't actually work in the case of posters that e.g. drive everyone bananas with the endless repetition of their cranky opinions. Those sort of people seem to be shut off from logical argument. I don't think they should be banned for being fools though.