|
Quote: |
|
|
|
|
Originally Posted by Big FN Deal |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Going through Army Basic Training taught me it's best at times to just fall back and blend in, not bringing attention to yourself for singling out but against my better judgement I won't follow that lesson ITT. I state that to say I'm weary of even discussing this topic because every Mod on OS is human, capable of errors in judgement and in spite of some seeming claims to the contrary, that can cause unfair outcomes and labeling of OS members/posters. However since the thread is open to discuss this topic and share opinions of it, hopefully without reprisal, I will.
I won't go into specifics but I was banned not too long ago for quite a few months over what I'll call a "misunderstanding" to be PC and obviously I was thankfully able to get reinstated but it happening in the first place was unfair. Now I understand this is a privately owned website to wit the ownership can do whatever they see fit but if the intention of said ownership is to be reasonably fair, I'm trying to point out that's not happening in all cases.
From personal experience, I think there should be some kind of more forum public and transparent review when someone is permabanned, not a public vote or anything that extreme for a privately owned business but maybe some kind of open sub-forum where the permabanned member can post in to publicly communicate with Mods and OS members for a period of time. At least then everything is out in the open and not in the back alleys of private emails and potential OS admin group think/gang mentality.
Again, this is just my two cents about what I think is fair, yet if the response to this is something akin to "a privately owned website can do whatever it wants", I completely understand that but then the gesture of allowing discussion ITT seems hollow, imo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know I sound like a broken record but.....we did this before. It was called the Cell. We would temp ban members who violated the TOS and either give them a time out for a few days/weeks or give them an opportunity to explain themselves before we permabanned them.
It didnt work. It was extra work for most of the mods. Most people who went to the Cell treated it like a joke. Also 99% of bans dont need an explanation and arent caused by miscommunications so there is no reason to give.
I'll give you some examples. Here is a list of the reasons people have been banned since this thread was posted:
- User directly insulted a Dev.
- User ignored mod request to keep the Madden Demo thread on topic by posting about the exclusive deal.
- User bashed EA without providing constructive support in same thread.
- User posted about pooping himself in a Madden thread.
- User insulted dev for changing his job.
- Multiple users who were previously banned users.
Thats it. Now look at that list. Do any of those reasons deserve debate? Do we need to discuss why people shouldnt insult developers or post about pooping himself (lol)?
Are mistakes going to be made? Yes, because some of the bans are based on judgment calls.
I'll give you another peak behind the scenes. Mil and I are the admins so any decision about a ban or reinstatement is made by either him or me. Now I hate giving reinstatements. I dont think I've given one in the three years I've been an admin. I've seen good posters that I like banned and not reinstated them because the reason they were banned was valid.
Mil, on the other hand, is nicer than me. He's reinstated a few people. Now there are VERY few people that he's reinstated because of a mod error or because the mod overstepped. Most of the time it was because he felt the user either apologized profusely and promised to never violate the TOS or because the user had spent enough time (sometimes months or years) on the sideline.
My point is if we thought mod error was a big cause of underserved people getting banned, we would make changes. We just arent seeing it.