DARKPLANT RISING Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 More like, making a new rule that if someone with 1000+ post count and a membership of over 1 year is so majorly hated among the community that 50+ people with 1000+ post count would say he should be banned, and no people with 1000+ post count disagree (except for the target), he will be banned on the spot. This rule is made to get rid of the "non-rule-breaking-but-hated" members. Specifically Herman. It was this thread that made me really want to kill him, and inspired me to create this thread. See, Herman's done a hundred negatives and not a single plus. I don't see why he should be alive. This is a community. If someone is being a negative influence to a community, and he doesn't improve, what happens in the real world? He "dies" socially. He gets fired from his job, and is left to die off on the streets. And I say that should go for this site too. Even if someone doesn't break the current rules, that doesn't mean he is a good member. There's something that would be far more negative to the community than making a simple spam thread or two, and I suppose you can guess what this is. I honestly think this would be good for the community. Very good, too. It would allow this to become a very happy place. The same should go for vice versa, with un-banning. This is just my opinion, but Welche, CDDRodrigo, etc...none of them deserved to be banned, and honestly, if they come back this site would become much more active. Even if someone broke a rule or two, I say it's fine as long as he was overall a positive influence. Are there any flaws in my arguments? I say no. If you're a mod and you feel this should be locked, first tell us why. First tell us your argument on why the hated should stay. You'll probably have a reason to lock a thread, right? If you agree with this idea, support. EDIT: Too much naysay. Lock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thar Ablaze Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 Although I'm already listed, I'll just post here and leave my mark on this thread. I hold no grudge, though. The guy's only stupid. He didn't break any rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihop Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 No support, anyone who doesn't break rules should have a right to stay. If you don't like him you can leave instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan Alda Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 As harsh as it seems at first, I'd agree; sometimes, you've just got to blackball people. Just make sure there's an official poll as opposed to an unofficial "I support this" thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihop Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 It's ok not to like someone but it's easy to just ignore the posts and move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Iwasawa Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 I support this as it makes sense. I dont like it, but it does make sense, and with the unbanning thing, would make this place more active. Support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan Alda Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 I support this as it makes sense. I dont like it, but it does make sense, and with the unbanning thing, would make this place more active. Support.From what I read, it's not necessarily permanent; if the guy repents, he can come back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihop Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 I'm cool with banned members returning, I'm not really a fan of permabans of people who don't directly aim to spam e.g. write let me in let me in let me in let me in about 500 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thar Ablaze Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 It's ok not to like someone but it's easy to just ignore the posts and move on. Not really. I myself even listed some people in my "Ignore" preferences box, but I couldn't help but click to show the post and see how stupid it looks. Desu did that with me a few times, but he couldn't resist reading them anyway, so he removed me from the list because he found it pointless. And if I must use a meme to sum this up: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihop Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 If you choose not to ignore it it must mean you enjoy reading stupid posts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bury the year Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 Then I'll just say I disagree with all the nominations so that nobody gets banned. 8'D But seriously. You shouldn't be kicked off a site because you aren't liked. That's an utterly stupid idea: ostracism died out with the Romans, after all. If someone bothers you that much, do what Thar suggests and use the "Ignore" preferences for once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thar Ablaze Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 If you choose not to ignore it it must mean you enjoy reading stupid posts? Yeah, I'll admit that stupid posts are fun to respond to. It's one reason why the internet's so addicting. EDIT: I hereby take back my support and say that this issue was stirred up from biased hatred towards one particular user and should not be a big enough issue to follow through on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DARKPLANT RISING Posted September 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 No support, anyone who doesn't break rules should have a right to stay. If you don't like him you can leave instead.The whole reason I made this thread is because we CAN'T leave stupid people. Or, perhaps change the Ignore preferences so that you can't see that someone posted AT ALL. That's another option. And I think ostracism itself was a wonderful idea. The only problem (a pretty big one at that) was that it was abused by politicians, but that can't happen in here. Also, my point was that negative influences should not be left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihop Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 If you want to ignore him, be my guest. The site gives an option for you to ignore all his posts so I don't see why you can't use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTW (For The Wynn) Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 The problem that I have with this is that this idea is abusable. You basically want to make this a rule specifically to get rid of a certain member of YCM. Now, this turns membership here into a popularity contest. My thoughts on the subject is that this should be more than a poll. It should be more court-like, where someone shows a bunch of links to items where people felt that someone had done something offensive. Then, allow for a bit of banter back and forth, and finally let a jury of say 3 or 5 mods/high rank members who are neutral on the subject decide the outcome. That's just an idea I came up with off of the top of my head, so improvements could be made or a better system reasoned out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DARKPLANT RISING Posted September 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 The problem that I have with this is that this idea is abusable. You basically want to make this a rule specifically to get rid of a certain member of YCM. Now, this turns membership here into a popularity contest.My thoughts on the subject is that this should be more than a poll. It should be more court-like, where someone shows a bunch of links to items where people felt that someone had done something offensive. Then, allow for a bit of banter back and forth, and finally let a jury of say 3 or 5 mods/high rank members who are neutral on the subject decide the outcome. That's just an idea I came up with off of the top of my head, so improvements could be made or a better system reasoned out.That could actually be a better idea. Well, I doubt many people would be neutral when judging someone majorly hated, but anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTW (For The Wynn) Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 Well, as close to neutral as possible. Someone who isn't going to go, "I think this guy should be gone because he's a f*cking c*********g pr*ck." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thar Ablaze Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 Well, as close to neutral as possible. Someone who isn't going to go, "I think this guy should be gone because he's a f*cking c*********g pr*ck." In this case, Desu would be a terrible judge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTW (For The Wynn) Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 In this case, Desu would be a terrible judge.True, but he might be an interesting lawyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thar Ablaze Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 True, but he might be an interesting lawyer. This is true. He even said he'd enjoy being one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Warden Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 I would make for a (reasonably) impartial judge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tourmaline Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 Is Wynn's suggestion replacing Darkplant's? I would support Wynn's idea. If it were to pass, would anybody have the five most objective, active thinkers of the forum in mind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihop Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 I feel 5 is too few, I think a number more like 10-15 would give a more fair showing of the site's views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Devil's Advocate Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 You can't ban someone for stupidity. Not saying that you shouldn't, but... I'm going to reiterate a previous statement that I said the other day pertaining to banning specific members: These kinds of thread serve no point except to start flame wars and in general bring down the quality of the forum. You should be ashamed for making such a thread. [/backseatmodding] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Cakey Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 You can't ban someone for stupidity. Not saying that you shouldn't, but...I think you've forgotten that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.