A ban-free environment

[WebSlave]

You know, I'm thinking about dropping the whole idea of banning someone from this site. The whole idea just makes me feel kind of dirty like I am some kind of micro-God and can banish someone with the wave of my magic wand. And I guess it makes me see a hint of old "you know who" when I look in the mirror. Who the heck am I to tell someone that they can't read what someone else wants to post here? Shouldn't that be at the reader's own discretion?

I would still keep the warning system in place, but it would be just as a nudge to people to let them know when they have stepped over the line on something, and also a guide to other people to see how a person handles themselves following set rules. But the banning level would be dropped.

Chaos? The end of civilization as we know it? The forums filled with garbage from people who SHOULD be banned?

Not hardly.

Each person has the capability of effectively banning a person from their view on this site. Check this out, if you haven't already:

The Ignore List (http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/forums/misc.php?s=&action=faq&page=1#buddy)

See? You personally can block absolutely anyone you want from having their messages posted on threads you read. So in effect, you can ban who the heck you want to, and I can stay out of the middle of it.

But this is a two edged sword, of course. There is always the possibility that a person on your Ignore List may very well say something you may want to hear, if you knew it was being said. And of course, it could get pretty lonely in here if everyone had everyone else on their own ignore list. But I guess it is possible to do, if you are so inclined.

And it takes the responsibility of knowing who to ban and when exactly it needs to be done and puts it squarely on YOUR shoulders.

So, what do you think?

[JungleHabitats]

Thats not a bad idea in the least ... this way when the ones that we know to be bad are talked about they can just shove there feet further down there throat. and that would IMO make the board alot more credible in the fact that no one can say well john doe isnt here to defend himself so its not fair .But you being the ADMIN still have full rein in locking down the hatches on a thread that gets on a head on collison with a train . so i would say to let the wolves out of there cage and let them do what they do best regardless or not if there banned does it really stop what they do best ?If there going to do people wrong they can do it just as well with there words in print where they cant erase them that has been proved here before ! so i say "RELEASE THE HOUNDS" lol im sure what ever you decide will be the right choice

[Seamus Haley]

Oddly enough... I think that the point system that has been put into place is more than fair and more than appropriate.

It might sound a bit odd, since I'm pretty sure that I'm the user with the highest warning level who wasn't an obvious troublemaking "Emergency Lockout" troll and the most likely candidate for incrimental, multiple offense style banning if it ever comes down to it BUT...

As much as I personally don't mind strong language, I also believe that there is a vast Silent Majority (In middle America?) who do potentially take offense...

Biggoted or hate speech really has no place on these boards.

The full name rule would become virtually unenforceable unless you and Ken are going to invest MUCH more time than you already have into moderating the boards and deleting posts and threads at the first offense.

The same goes for inappropriate forum posting, inappropriate title terms and shotgun/spamming advertising in the classifieds sections.

There already exists a forum that is essentially lawless on a few of it's boards... The Reptile Room over at Novogate has the war room forums. Are they a lot of fun? Sure. Are they mature and reasonable discussions about business related topics? Not even close (they weren't intended to be). Despite the somewhat vocal objections of a few people who find the current system cutting off any toes that move up to that line, I believe... have no hard evidence really, but I *believe* that the majority of fauna posters are more than content to obey the very few, very simple rules that have been set forth to maintain the attitude required for the goal the BOI and Fauna have set out to accomplish.

Sometimes it seems as if an idea has more support than it does because a few lonely sociopaths (I think we all know who I mean here) are frothing at the mouth and drooling all over themselves to spout off their ideas (meaning "critiscism because things didn't go their way")... Don't let the ravings of an unproductive minority deter you from the path you have chosen.

I'd like to throw in there that I don't consider Alan and his response to be the ravings of the deranged, I just wonder if it's really the right decision to cave in to the Gubitzs, Adam Blocks, Gilbert Thompsons, "Roger Jolly"s, Upstate Exotics and other individuals who see the world as win or lose... and their history here as losing. They are not presenting reasonable critiscism or suggestion, they're just being noisy because their own mistakes came and bit them in the... Business reputation.

[JungleHabitats]

You my friend have a beautiful way with words lol


The reason i had stated to let the banned wolves back in the wild is this .

For the ones who are banned well it is obvious to most of why there were banned ?

Now When people make a inquiry as to those people on the BOI and all they get are the rest of us explaining why not to do buisnes with that person/s or advising them against it as to there reptuation IE: of how they feel and there actions and how they respond to criticisim of conflict about them as doing buisness

By letting them have the right to respond to there accusers and when they respond there "demeanor" in that response will do two things in my opinion:[list=1]
Show the person that had asked about them to see how this person/s handles them self under the gun of the peers whom have witnessed there wrong doings
or just validate what the other board memeber have warned the asker of
[/list=1]

Also i think that if Webslave could somehow have it set up that a banned member/user that is allowed back into/onto the forums and Boi in a whole could possibly make it known in that persons signature/profile or when they post that that person/s have been banned in the past and for there conduct that got them banned ?

im not sure if that really came out the way my meager lil mind was thinking or not lol .

kind of like ( and not to compare them to ) but a sexual offender or such they have to list that they are a convicted what ever or no different then a felon if you have done something wrong in your past its of PUBLIC record to everyone around you..Now i can here whats going to come now lol what if that person has changed ?? well thats great if they have but they will have to work harder to Prove to the community as a whole that yes they have a record ... but they have changed there ways since then being convicted or what ever ? gee i hope i making even a little sense lol let me try this



Ok say the banned person username is this :

John Does Reptiles

when he makes a post in any forum he would be indentified in that post as such that follows >

John Does Reptiles
123 Nowhere Lane
Somewhere ST
Previously banned :Level 1 offense


Now if there was something set up like the points system
(like the points to explain what that offense was for )
then people that didnt knowwhy or what had happened before could be aware with out searching through yrs of threads to try and figure it out for themsleves ? i dont know maybe im being crazy and im sure webslave will think so ... lol ok im done rambling on

[WebSlave]

Damn..... over 6,300 members on this site and only eight (8) people have voted on this.

Maybe I need to just delete ALL of the forums and just have this whole site one great big humongous forum.

I'll name it The Board of Inquiry Plus :bluegrab:

[Clay Davenport]

I haven't voted because I can't decide. I see points to favor both directions.
I don't think you should abandon all banning entirely, there will come a point that someone will need it.
I can see putting a hold on bannings except for extreme circumstances though, just keep the option open.
Either way you go I don't forsee you ever getting to the point of banishment to the level that would begin to compare with other havens of attempted total information control.
I hear there's going to be a book burning before long and the titles of all remaining herp books will end with "for dummies" :rolleyes:

[TheGhost]

Rich Just let more people know about this!!

Ignore lists are used for those people who's messages you wish not to read. By adding someone to your ignore list, those messages posted by these individuals will be hidden when you read a thread.

You do a good job and the point system is very good and fair. I do think you need to do a better job of staying on it as it looks unfair when you see some things people have points for and others that get away with murder. I think many have the impression it's just so you can use the points to ban somebody if they're on your nerves. I don't know that's why you did it but I always assumed that.

Either way I support you even if you decide to ban me.

[Ritchie Luna]

I think many have the impression it's just so you can use the points to ban somebody if they're on your nerves. I don't know that's why you did it but I always assumed that.

Wow
1. He made mutliple user names after being banned.
2. I ritchie Luna got a warning because of his $t^)id @$$

and he says it is unfair?

The guy who is back to his own tricks after being banned?

[Ritchie Luna]

I voted for ban free.


only because ban free within reason is not available.
Some people do need to be banned. Someone somewhere in the future needs such actions taken against them.

[TheGhost]

Case in point Webslave, the guy can't even leave me alone in here. This is insane!

My post is meant to be productive, I was telling you how I felt about the point system.

Why don't you do this. Tell me I can't make comments towards him and he in turn can't towards me. It would be nice for somebody adult to step in and end this chishish crap as it's starting to not only be very uncalled for but all together annoying to many fauna users.

[WebSlave]

I'm thinking of a "go to your room, and don't come out till I say so" kind of a ban. Lower the total points necessary for that to kick in, say maybe 10 points, yet limit the banning to 10 to 30 days. Kind of a cooling off period. Of course, I am never going to remember to check up on someone temporarily banned, so unless they remind me about it they will be banned until I have a reason to think about them again.

But I don't know, maybe I'm just making more work for myself.

The warning system now in place was to be able to give someone fair warning that what they are doing is not acceptable here. But perhaps I should reevaluate the weighting of the infractions. Make the ones more indicative of premeditated abuse more to the level of a "three strikes and you are out" system.

I had hoped the warning points would help guide people to do two things here:

(1) Establish credibility by stating your identification and keep things on an even keel.

(2) Keep the discussions at least appearing that we have adults participating in the forums rather than kids huffing and strutting in the schoolyard.

Perhaps another method is needed to meet these goals.

Or I could just simplify it even further and use the technique that another webmaster uses on his own site: "Anyone can be banned at any time, for whatever reason I may think of at the time that fits the situation."

As for the Adam Block/Ritchie Luna/ Jason Sweigart "love triangle" I think that all three of you better start ignoring each other. Pronto.

[JungleHabitats]

i like the cooling off period idea

would there be a way to do something like this ?

10 points - 10 day ban from posting 1st offense(read only)
20 points - 20 day ban from posting 2nd offense(read only)
30 points - 30 day ban from posting 3rd offense(site ban)
40 points - banned indefinately by webslave (total ban)

gave it set up with a "3 strikes " your out rules but at the same time you would have the grace period for them to think about getting out of hand next time.


but if it could be done this was to make it easy on you not to forget about there bans have it set so that you can just check a box and that it would possibly be on a timer like you tell it 10 days ,20 days etc?
i dont know i just woke up from a short over needed rest lol so if this is garbage talk im sorry lol :o

[TheGhost]

Alan

10 points - 10 day ban from posting 1st offense(read only)
20 points - 20 day ban from posting 2nd offense(read only)
30 points - 30 day ban from posting 3rd offense(site ban)
40 points - banned indefinately by webslave (total ban)


Excellent idea! Very good, you would need somebody to evenly enforce the TOS though. Someobdy who you feel would be fair. Or put it up to a vote.

In the poll I said not to ban anybody however I think the above is a great idea. With the points and making public what they did effectivly you're not banning anybody they're banning themselves.

The only thing I can't stress enough is to find somebody fair to issue points. Like maybe my wife.

[JungleHabitats]

IMO then you would have people casting votes just becasue they dont like someone and IMO that would be worse then just a out right ban w/o explanation.

[TheGhost]

Sorry I didn't say what I thought, this is why I'm always looking like a fool on the BOI. I never come of well with written word, not sure why but what I mean and what I type don't come of the same.

I was meaning put the person in charge of giving points up to a vote.

The trouble with the point system is that Rich wants a little bit of a life and he can't just run around looking for volations. He needs somebody who uses fauna a lot to step up and say they're willing (I think).

Is that what I said my last post or not?

[Darin Chappell]

The problem is that if you do not ban the ones who so desperately need it, the rest of us have to suffer through their idiocies all the time. That may not be a big enough problem to justify the demigod sensation you are getting by banning people, but it is something to consider.

I realize one can choose to use the ignore button, but try doing that sometime in a heated discussion on the BOI wherein someone has posted a dozen times over a period of twenty minutes in a heated argument with someone you have not ignored! It doesn't make for good reading, I assure you.

I am biased, though. I have to admit that certain individuals would brighten my day by never entering into my thoughts again. I do not consider them at all unless they post here, and everything would be coming up daisies for me if they no longer could. But I am not "King of the Internet" for that and a variety of other reasons, I am certain.

[JungleHabitats]

Well first i just want to say please if you take offense that well beyond my control guys.One thing IMO that really clutters up the forums and ESP the BOI is the on going fueds between a few certain people i wont mention names because i think it is obvious.

I can somewhat understand that each of you want to prove that the other is wrong and maybe i have not read enough into it to really know the " whole story" butits probably due to the fact that i could really care less. I know i do not like the fact that it seems you chase each other from thread to thread to make your points i believe as long as some of this has gone on here you would come to the conclusion that its not going to be solved like some Miracle from Benny Hin thats going to come down slap you on the forhead and Viola its over.I also understand that iy really digs at each of you when the other posts something thats somewhat understandable but i think if you both were to just drop the ball and refuse to respond to the others actions it would really go away and not be such a factor in that if one doesnt bring up the others name then the other should have no reason to respond ?Its human nature to want or feel the need to defend yourself when attacked but if you can find it to not feel the need to attack there would be no need to defend. And if those are not plauseable things to work with maybe you need your own " hidden" spot to just go for the juggulars where only you and people who want to watch it go down can have a usergroup set up for that so that anytime you feel that need you and anyon who cares to watch can "login into" that usergroup and well get it on there . I dont know for sure but i can only imagine that when others login in to the forums and read thread after thread it only does some level of damage to the credences(sp) of the use of this board/s and just gives outsiders who depise the forums here a more even keeled argument to say if you dont think that board this or that go look at this thread , that thread and you will see what i mean .

So with that that would be something i would suggest to be added if you must argue with each other that you have your own room to do so in . And save others of having to weed through threads of off topic stalkings just to prove points.

[WebSlave]

Well, with just 18 votes out of over 6,000 registered members, obviously most people don't care one way or the other.

I have reinstated Neil Gubitz. And no, I am not going to ban Adam Block again as I was seriously thinking of doing.

I am extremely afraid of incrementally becoming another "you know who" with this banning stuff.

If people get out of hand, I will incorporate temporary bans to give them a cooling off period. If necessary, this will encompass ALL members participating in a heated feud. If at all possible, I will issue one, and only one, warning.

But my best suggestion to everyone is that if you don't care to read what someone is writing, then don't. No one is twisting your arm to read their messages, so if you do read them, please don't complain to me about it.

[Wilomn]

I think you may not have many commenting on this topic because they don't know it's here. I just found out by a kindly pm sent to me.

I think there should be an option of permanent banning. Some people abuse the priviledge of being here. They do so repeatedly. gubitz is a perfect example.

Rich, you will always be a far cry from jeff over at ks. This is obvious from everything you do and the manner in which you do it. But like any parent sometimes when you say no, you really have to mean no. Otherwise it will never matter what you say. You will lose credibility.

Perhaps a lind over on the boi would help get more opinions on this topic.

Wes Pollock

[Dragondad]

I have to agree with Wes, I think the problem with this thread isnt that people dont care its that people dont know. I rarely go outside of the BOI or a couple of other topics and just discovered this by accident. And yet my vote seemed to even out the score to the point is back to your choice.

I agree some sort of ban needs to be there( the cooling off) but as with some they do need to be able to defend themselves. Or at least continue to spout the dribble so we can become even more unimpressed. I am not in favore of any sort of permanent ban.

[TheGhost]

fueds between a few certain people i wont mention names because i think it is obvious.

You aren't talking about me are you? Haaaa, no I know you were.


I think some people, like myself have a hard time with aspects of the BOI. Many of you lucky ones don't and maybe don't get why the others do. For myself, the BOI has taught me more about people and myself then anything else.


I think people learn, it's easy to get mixed up trying to stick up for yourself. Understanding the other person is key and that part of the BOI I have a hard time with. I rush to post and almost never read what I'm saying twice. Because of this not only do my posts have too many errors but they're all emotion.


I personally have a hard time walking away knowing that even if I don't stick up for myself I'm still okay and it doesn't make what the other person said true. Something I've started to learn, and while slow, still learned.


Rich, I think letting Neil back was a good thing. He's a good guy and I think has learned from the past. Some never do but I think he has, and I have as well. Sometimes you all may doubt that but time tells no lies.


Here's what I would do.

1) Give 24 hours bans! I think that's fine and would be a good idea, if you feel somebody is being too emotional ban them for 24 hours.

2) I don't know if this is possible but give a punishment like 20 good posts in the forums helping with new herpers questions.

3) Limit BOI posts to something, limits force people to use what they say wisely, you have no limits. eBay feedback is the way it is for a reason, and it works very well. It forces people to make and get to the point. Nobody reads posts as long as mine is now anyway so keep posts to say 1000-5000 words or to a number of posts you allow each user to have in any one thread.


The draw is and always will be the BOI, emotions are here to stay but do what you can to keep them down when you can.

[Seamus Haley]

keep posts to say 1000-5000 words or to a number of posts you allow each user to have in any one thread.

Please don't.

[TheGhost]

Well, okay I'm wordy too, I wouldn't like it but thought it should be mentioned.

I think a wise option may be to give people a BOI time out. That's where the BS is and that's what you should give time outs from.

[WebSlave]

Yes, I like the idea of a timeout, but it will take a certain change in attitude about how it is administered. The warning point system is good for reminders and a record visible to the person being warned as well as people seeing what sort of infractions the warned person has inflicted upon him or her self. But I think I will not be using it much as the direct yardstick of giving someone a "timeout".

For one thing, when two or more people get into a heated discussion and it becomes apparent that they all need to be taking a break from it, then I have to start assessing warning points to each of them, and heaven forbid if one person gets more points than the other. So I believe the timeout will have to be pretty much spontaneous, or at least after a suitable warning has been issued within the thread. Perhaps the warning of an impending timeout ban should be in the warning system itself, to be kept on record, as should the temporary ban itself. The warning system could be a very effective means of providing a visual record of someone's actions on this site.

Except in an emergency situation where I have to shut someone down NOW, I do not want the warning point system to automatically trigger a ban based on accumulated points. Or do I?

This is going to take some thought on my part. But you know, sometimes this site is a really big pain in the rear for me.
Just the fact that I have to have a warning system in place to try to keep people acting like adults is rather depressing.

[Stardust]

I have been very busy of late and pre-occupied so I did not vote, didn't even see it as a matter of fact. I have voted on some. Had I had to to be looking and did see it I would not have said any of the three, but stated more of a "time out" so to speak. IMO there has to be rules and there has to be consequences. I think a "time out" would be good as it would give people time to think, with no access at all, zip, for like, say, two weeks. Or one thru four weeks depending on the severity of the rules. With that being said and with out full banning perhaps the points should be less than tweny five. Perhaps ten.
Just throwing out my opinion and ideas



I just cut and paste to continue here :)

[Stardust]

You do have some good points of the warning points vs. the immediate "time out" and I can only imagine the the frustration of this site at times. I am making some webstites and it is very frustrating at times, so your position has to be a huge pain.
Perhaps, as and idea only, as I am sure there are a lot of people who would like to help on this site, you could appoint, not moderators per se' but "time out umpire" or "referee". People who you have seen to be fair yet firm and could possibly take time slots of "donation time"????
Just throwing things out here.

[JungleHabitats]

Webslave ,

I have a guy writing me a system for points on my forum. i have advised him id like it to be sort of a "self governing system"
To the point i as the admin can asess points where deemed fit. after a certain number of points are assesed the time out would go into effect to that person.To lessen the personal interaction on my part hes going to incorporate that when points are assesed to a individual that a auto repson email goes out to the person who is warned , after he is warned a second violation would incorporate the point beining assesed to that person then the auto respond will alert them of the violation and the point.As the admin i would have control to set how many points will be allowed before the get the time out.I would also have the ability to after set the length of the time out applied to a person. so say you get your first time out for say 24 hrs , then the second will be 48hrs this would all be preset limits by the admin as to how long each timeout period would be and would keep track of the timeouts given to any person and there lengths.

i think that esp with in the relms of your site with the volume of people and potentially explosive attitudes that can flare very fast would be something to look into as a self governing system i know you have expressed that you do not have the time to spend here to "babysit people" and be the parent figure for them nor should you have to. It can be very consuming for you to ramble through tons of threads each day to see whos being bad when you have a ton more stuff to do.Ithink also assigning someone or more then one to act as "Hall monitors" for theforums would be a good idea. If you didnt want to give them permission to they could atleast act as a go between for you and these boards by letting them be able to give out warnings to people that with in a thread have the potential or have already exploded into something that should not be . While they could either post with in the thread as a "first warning to the people that have got out of hand to either cool out or they risk being pointed. and have theat moderator then forward you the thread , page and person/s involved in the warning .If then at that point they do not adhere to the warning they could be locked out of that thread versus the entire thread being locked ? not sure if that is feasable or not to lock out a indivdual user overthe entire locking of the thread... just some thing i have been lookingto have incorperated in to my forums and i have it mainly to thank from my time here . to be able to see what could possibly be a alterntive to a all out ban of a user . i would also suggest that people have a warning given to them for taking a thread off course of the orginal topic with that you could also have a potential moderator have the access to be able to warn them or those who are driving a topic off its intended course to either stay on track or start there own thread to continue there debates.If that wasnt enough that Mod could then have the authority to move the threads into a topicical discussion of its own to advert many pages og garbage not realivant to the topic. I think and i will admit i have probably done some of this myself as well as id say anyone who posts can be guilty of that.But when as in the Neil Gubitz Guud guy thread it took such a train wreck effect it just makes anyone reading it to have to go through way to many un-needed reads to get out of it what they need
just some thought of some one whos just getting there legs wet in doing what you do and have done .. not sure if it would be practical or even something you would want here but just thoughts ?
:confused:

[Stardust]

Well now, after a few hours of no responses I am getting the picture of your frustration at times.
Perhaps it is only the BOI.

[WebSlave]

I guess you can all stop voting now. It's a moot point.

[dwedeking]

How about you leave the site wide open and just charge for the rope. At $.50 a foot it sounds like it would be the VERY economically viable :D

[Stardust]

LOL, just picturing a little hangman under the persons name instead of how many point they have. First the head, body, arm, ect......

[WebSlave]

Hah! You know, that hangman icon is not a half bad idea at all!

[W.Wedeking]

I believe the majority of the people here are adults, and as adults we all know that life has rules and that breaking rules means paying the consequences. Consequences are what make us (well most of us anyway) think twice before we do something that has been deemed unacceptable.

My personal opinion is that there is no need to indulge anyone who has broken these rules, especially to a point where they have been banned. They chose their actions knowing full well what the consequences were, and their actions are not dependent on anyone else other than themselves. And with this point system, it isn't like they aren't given plenty of warning/chances to redeem themselves.

I think "un-banning" has sent the message that the consequences aren't real/serious, therefore, they can continue their unacceptable behavior because they can then turn around and say "sorry" or "it's not fair" and they will be let back in to do it again. In fact, I find unbanning very unfair to those who are very carefull about respecting the rules. If these people are going to be allowed back time and time again, why should anyone pay any attention to the rules? And if the rules don't matter, then why be here because the purpose of these forums is lost.

I understand that this is not a simple issue for you Rich. I realize that this forum has taken on a life of it's own since you started it and like any child, it can be difficult to keep up with at times. Perhaps if you enlisted the help of a couple more moderators it could help relieve some of the burden that comes with being Cult Leader.

Speaking of which, is it time for oreo cookies yet? :lick:

[WebSlave]

Wendy, I hear what you are saying about adding moderators, but I have seen far too many examples of hiring bad moderators being much worst than no moderators at all.

I think temporary bans will be the way I will go, unless I see the reason to change my thinking. Of course, if someone is a pain in the butt enough, I can just ban them every month until they get tired of it and just go away.

Heck, if I were smart about it I would make the requirement be that a request to be unbanned would need to be attached to a $100 PayPal donation...... Maybe I need to smack myself alongside the head and become a bit more mercenary in nature. :firedevil

[TheGhost]

Rich, speaking of money. I think you should have a $10 yearly fee to post here, or at least the BOI. Hell, if I were you I would do it just to see who would stay and who wouldn't.

Come up with a fee for something, stop being stupid about it all. Time to get greedy :kaboom:

[WebSlave]

Well Adam, I have thought of this as a possibility when things got kind of slow with the banner advertising a while back. But I figured this would be just another can of worms.

What happens when someone has a bunch of negative stuff said about them on the BOI and wants to respond, only to find that they have to PAY in order to defend themselves there? They will be screaming bloody murder that it is extortion for them have to pay for that right to post a rebuttal. They will absolutely demand that I let them get on there and post for free.

So what do I do? Tell them no? Yeah, THAT will go over real well, I am certain.

As far as the numbers of people that would remain? Heck, it probably would look like a fox had jumped into the hen house!! LOL!!

[TheGhost]

Hadden't thought of that! Rich, I think you're just funked no matter what you do!

I think then you need to work on other ways of getting income. I'll think about this..

[JungleHabitats]

while i understand your point in having people gripe about there "right to defend themselves" to post in the BOI here is how i look at it .

If someone is doing buisness and puts them self in the postion to have to defend them selves ,chances are that they plan on selling more then just as a one time thing.I would say that it is no different then that person paying to have the right to sell there stuff on a paying classifieds ( you know where ) so i think a $10 fee to be able to come on here to defend your self would serve a good thing.If someone plans on staying around in this buisness as a good person they would have no problem in paying the $10 fee to defend / protect there name in there defense. The person that is not willing to pay the $10 to do so more then likely really doesnt care what people think of them anyway so the fact of not defending themselves doesnt matter , and probably must know what was said is true so why should they pay $10 to come in to lie about it anyway.I think if you set up something like that to let people know as of 1/1/04 that this would go into effect you would be surprised in a good way in the number of people willing to do so.
JMHO
Alan

[W.Wedeking]

Alan, if you check, you will see that many of us donate regularly to this site. Not only dollar amounts, but time and energy promoting the site and helping out "behind the scenes" so to speak. I think if it were to become a mandatory pay site, alot of that support may disapear.

You could look at making an "Idiot tax" or fining someone a set monitary amount for certain infractions however I am not sure that would work either.

There would be only one way to enforce it = banning until amount was paid

This might be a plus, but there would be people who would be breaking the rules simpley because they only have to pay a few $$ for it so not much detourant there.

It is any of our responcibilities to teach people how to behave in a public forum. We are adults and we should all know by now. If someone can't behave, why should the rest who can, have to deal with them?

Personally, I weed these types of people out of my personal life as well as my business life. Why would I do all that just to come "hang out" with them on a public forum? If I wanted that, I would just move to a trailer park and get cable tv so I could watch Jerry Springer.

[JungleHabitats]

well i guess back to square one Webslave... its your site drive it how you see fit .

Respectfully Alan

[Stardust]

As I do a lot of weeding in my personal life, I do understand what Wendy is saying. I believe the last soap saga I watched was the Luke and Laura saga, long long ago.
I do not agree with having to pay to be on this site. I have not "donated" money although I do support and buy from the sellers of this site.
I do agree with having a fine given to get back in. It does not harm the people who do not break the rules, and hits the offenders where it hurts, the pocket book. They do then have a choice on whether they can stick up for themselves and they are paying for the consequences of their actions. As the point system should be lowered since the no banning the fines should get stiffer when there are repeat offenders.
Rich, I understand that you have a lot to do. I have also seen a lot of people here that do not bend your rules. Perhaps instead of looking at other sites and moderators there, you should try and trust one or two of your oh so loyal cult followers to give you a hand. You can give limited abilities until you feel comfortable to give full reins. :)

[WebSlave]

Ken is doing a fine job as moderator here. Ritchie really isn't in that role, but on occasion he will do so as needed. I am comfortable with their abilities, even though there are times when I might have done something differently.

I don't believe anyone other than the owner of a site should have admin rights for day to day activities. I know that if I logged into my own site one morning and found that my *admin* had completely changed the structure, I would be just a bit irritated about it. Or maybe they did an *oopsie*, and deleted the database.

Actually I was only kidding about charging people that were banned to come back on here. But heck, if things get tight with the advertising, maybe I will do that. And at the same time, set the ban level to 1 warning point... :dgrin: Retroactively, of course.

But truthfully, I would rather not have any disincentives for people to join in here. Even the bad guys have their place for pure entertainment purposes. And they can be very instructive to new people to see exactly how NOT to act in a situation.

[Gary O]

I see you already made your choice. I am kinda upset at myself for missing this thread.

Webslave I am not advertising none lol just posting my opinion. But as Seamus stated on page one my site has The War Rooms and one of them rooms is an anything goes room. Mostly for BS and to keep the BS off my other forums. I really thought about having a no banning no rules message board, but I knew it would not work. Who would join then right? lol So I made a forum for it, it has worked nicely too.

Banning people sucks. And for the service you provide it really sucks. lets say someone gets banned then next week gets on a bad guy thread on the BOI.........


I read the here often but never post as I have stated before. There is no real reason for it other then I run two other message boards and am a mod on another and I get lazy lmao.

But Webslave you run a great site here and you should be proud of what you have. Many people that have sites are shooting for what you have. Keep up the great work!

Oh yeah........I agree with Webslave about the mod thing. Only he should have admin powers. Then he knows what is going on at all times with his site. And I also agree you should know your mods cause they can destroy what you have built.


AGF

[dvf1973]

unless its the threat of physical harm, or sexual, racial, or religious slander no- i love this freedom, for its our most important,words are just that, i do feel you could use this warning system in an affectual way like hey dont respond to this one guy hes got 300 warnings, to me that would be a ya mess with fire kind of warning, and boo hoo to you if you get your feelings hurt, so many places are so tip toeish but its all a matter of opinion and or reaction , thanks d