post here if you favor replacing our Suggest Ban system with a Killfile system

http://www.fatally-yours.com/wp-content/uploads/ghoulies.jpg

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/5199/screenshot20110207at113.png

Difference between gabbnebb and dom is that Dom was mod banned

I don't think gabnb us actually going to come back btw

laurel, SB improves your experience of ILX, but also makes others' experience of ILX less enjoyable. why should the rearrangement of ILX to suit your taste deprive other folks of someone's presence?

I don't want to go all argument by analogy here, but it's like banning certain music or speech from the radio. wouldn't it be great if you could ban glenn beck from the airwaves? yeah, but you could also just change the channel. I'm just not that into silencing ppl I guess. that mindset doesn't compute for me.

I'm not anti-banning, btw, but the threshold seems to be getting pretty low.

Think it's still 51

lol

I wd favour raising it to 54 just so I can make the same crappy Sammy Hagar joke once every couple of months.

But 51 has kind of entered the Kaballah now with the whole Antimony thing so

raise it to 77 imo

How long does a SB last? Is it 6 months? (Someone upthread suggested that you might collect 51 sbs over the course of six moths) How long are you banned after you get 51? If you're banned do you return with a blank slate?

a blank slate, a potty mouth and a heart full of vengeance

I think it's 30 days, with an increasing number of days with each subsequent SB... 30/60/90

though the length of the ban is subject to mod discretion and I think has been bent before?

http://rhymeculture.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/c_group_50-people.jpg

SBs are 30 days. I think from here on in, we'll be opening with repeat SBs garnering 60 with the proviso that may be lengthened/shortened/permabanned based on case-by-case complications.

http://www.hartfordmag.com/images/stories/50People_0910.jpg

Michael, to your first question, six months is correct.

so to clarify, deej and whiney are both out for 30 this go round.
so it is written so shall it be done
and now the dancing girls

http://www.kansasdisciples.org/images/QA%2050%20people.jpg

but the SB system is a social experiment in the taming of ILX of all negative expressions and behavior, I get it

this is such exaggerated bullshit, dude. i personally feel like i've had ample freedom to be curmudgeonly and antagonistic and argumentative, and have explored that freedom to my hearts' content without ever getting an especially high SB count. if there are people whose appetites for posting negativity is larger if not boundless, giving them a timeout probably isn't going to 'tame' them anyway, but it'll at least give other people a break from them.

can you unblock my work and home ip addresses?

I think there should be a SB thread that the banned alone can post to - a kind of ILX purgatory.

Voyage of the Banned

it's called THE REST OF THE INTERNET

Banned à part

haha forks otm

Actually from what I can see this would only overcomplicate the system it would have the added problem of moving the goalposts every day - the number of unique visitors fluctuates quite a lot and no one would ever know where they stood or how close they were to a ban.

― Matt DC, Monday, February 7, 2011 6:53 AM (5 hours ago) Bookmark

Then take average daily counts for a week and generate a number. Point is if sb is meant to be the majority opinion then you might want to figure out how many the majority actually is.

also i just do not get the appeal of killfile, especially as a replacement for SBs. just because i don't love a particular person's posts doesn't mean i necessarily want to look at the whole board through a filter that removes their posts and probably makes threads they participate in harder to follow or enjoy. and what if your issue with someone is that they like to say mean things to or about you? killfiling them just makes you ignorant of what they're saying and less able to do anything about it.

if people think 51 is just too low a number, why get complicated about it, just change it to 101. there are some people that will hit that goal easy anyway.

Suggest Ban Permalink
I think there should be a SB thread that the banned alone can post to - a kind of ILX purgatory.

― Le mépris vient de la tête, la haine vient du cœur (Michael White), Monday, February 7, 2011 1:16 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Think that's what Whiney was going for here, before he got bored.
http://twitter.com/WhineyArea51#

Point is if sb is meant to be the majority opinion then you might want to figure out how many the majority actually is.

I am pretty sure that it was not intended to be a majority opinion.

the sad truth is that the vast vast majority of ilx posters don't make much of an impression and don't differentiate themselves in my mind at all, good or bad. this is probably true of everyone and probably true of my writing to everyone else.

i've changed my mind on sb's in the past year (used to think was ok, now don't) but i can't find the post where i talked about it. it doesn't really matter, does it?

I don't like it either, but I s/b like a demon because it's there and I can't help myself.

I am pretty sure that it was not intended to be a majority opinion.

It's just an arbitrary threshold beyond which you are no longer fit for posting society.

It's a pretty large threshhold!

also i just do not get the appeal of killfile, especially as a replacement for SBs. just because i don't love a particular person's posts doesn't mean i necessarily want to look at the whole board through a filter that removes their posts and probably makes threads they participate in harder to follow or enjoy. and what if your issue with someone is that they like to say mean things to or about you? killfiling them just makes you ignorant of what they're saying and less able to do anything about it.

yes, otm

i think we should all be able to edit each others posts
--goole

Booming post

This is almost what IRE was like when everyone was a mod

And thn everyone just benned each other

Rip lingbert

Originally there was a poll on the mod board about whether we want "democratic bans". But at some point this turned into "51 clicks and you're out", a random number which I've never heard any admin explain... Yet pro-SB tend to justify it as if it's some kind of vox populi, even though no one knows how big the populi actually is.

Here's an idea: count the average amount of unique daily visitors in 2010 (i.e. add up the unique visitors for each of the 365 days, then divide the result by 365), and is someone gets more SBed than 50% of that number, then he's banned. Do the same for the year 2012, 2013, etc. Shouldn't be too much of an effort to do this once a year, and then the results would actually resemble a "democratic ban".

i don't like the idea of using 50% of the # of active users because then i feel like my impartiality becomes a tacit approval of shitty/disruptive posting

Why does it have to be a "vox populi"? Why can't it just be "an awful lot of people"?

wish john d. was still around to tell tuomas to stfu.

oh THAT'S how you do an average

Yeah, Tuomas, that threshold is kind of meaninglessly high.

wish whiney g. weingarten was still around to tell tuomas

http://www.big-t-shirts.com/ProdImages/big/792.jpg

if it's not a majority you are back to the problem of the other side who don't want the person banned having no say whatsoever.

they expressed themselves - they did not ban the person

Well we could supplement "suggest ban" with "suggest awesome"?

i don't really understand? i tacitly express my approval of almost all ilx posters, by not banning them.

i'd be ok with a like/dislike system where you can go positive or negative and get banned at -51 or whatever. but i think the current system is alright, it seems to take a lot of disruptive behavior to get to 51

an ilx "like" button would result in a disgusting popularity contest imo

IT'S ABOUT THAT TIME

http://www.denofgeek.com/siteimage/scale/800/600/56658.png