Public Ban List Proposal

Author: bsh1

Posts

Total: 59
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
There have been some users who have called for a public ban list to be created to make the usership aware of why banned users were banned and, indeed, whether a user was banned at all. 

I am quite wary of such a list, and feel like it runs counter to the privacy interests of the banned members. I am concerned also that such a list would make it harder for banned members to reintegrate into the site, and that such a list would not be truly different from call out threads, which are otherwise prohibited as personal attacks.

I am curious, however, to hear other voices and perspectives on the question. No user has yet been banned by me or my team, but it is almost inevitable that, at some point, that action will have to be taken. I am interested in hearing the arguments on both sides of the issue, so that I can carefully consider whether to implement such a policy for moderation.

Please feel free to comment, particularly on (a) whether such a list should exist in the first place and (b) how much detail should be included in the list should it be implemented. 

RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 544
Posts: 18,118
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
No, the banned users want the infamy and aside from that the ones who want discretion you accurately address in your concerns.

There is no third type of banned user who deserves to stay banned. A banned user either wants no one to know what they did or everyone to know how great at it they were. The only other kind of 'banned' user is the type who you should let be reformed and not stay banned in the long run as they will want to fix what they did wrong and not mind admitting it.


bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@RationalMadman
I'm not entirely sure I follow...
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
1
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
1
2
I think Banned lists are made for those who were banned so that they can read for themselves why they can no longer logon to the site. It's simply a time management tool for mods.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 544
Posts: 18,118
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@bsh1
I say no.
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@Goldtop
I think Banned lists are made for those who were banned so that they can read for themselves why they can no longer logon to the site. It's simply a time management tool for mods.
Banned users will be informed via PM prior to their banned. No user will be banned--with or without a list--without them having been given notice. So, that is not a reason in favor of a ban list, as I see it.

Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
1
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
1
2
-->
@bsh1
I wasn't telling you how to do your job, I was merely explaining the reason for Banned lists.
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@Goldtop
Right, I understand that. My response was clarifying why I don't find that argument persuasive. What I am doing in this thread is soliciting arguments, which I will then consider.
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
1
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
1
2
Ah, so a tool that helps you is not an argument to consider, Gotcha.

*Note to self, mods actually do not want any help when they ask for it as they know not what they do.


bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@Goldtop
As I said, it's not an argument for a ban list, insofar as users will be informed of their ban under either system. As you said:

 Banned lists are made for those who were banned so that they can read for themselves why they can no longer logon to the site
You wrote here that these lists were for the banned users, not the mods. But the banned users receive the same information in either system, and thus it's a non-unique argument.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 22,108
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@bsh1
Maybe use a list as a 2nd strike? like the 2nd ban gets the list? Escalation of punishment?

bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@Greyparrot
I am not comfortable with using public shaming as a punishment. That would be to legitimize personal attacks as a tool for moderators, when moderators prohibit other users from making personal attacks. 
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@bsh1
I think it is right of you not to make a list. The people asking for a list may or may not be aware that their intentions are no good.
Vader
Vader's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 14,404
5
8
11
Vader's avatar
Vader
5
8
11
I don't think it serves any benefit, nor do I think it serve as anything detrimental. However, if people want to use the ban list as a source of reference about a persons absence, I could see the benefits of making one. As for privacy, well then it should not be a real concern tbh. I mean they got banned in the first place, which means they stirred up some attention to get a mod involved. It serves them right.

I also don't think this should be a sign of public shame like "LOOK AT THIS, IF YOU DO NOT COOPERATE PREPARE TO MEET YOUR DEMISE" and then proceed to publicly shame. 

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 22,108
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@bsh1
I think it also gives a reason for some people to make coalitions against the moderators, undermining the order of the site,
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@Greyparrot
That was also on my mind, but there's an extent to which that might happen regardless.
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
Based on the feedback already offered, I continue to lean away from creating a ban list. I am still open, however, to being persuaded otherwise. I'm bumping this thread to continue to solicit feedback on the idea, particularly regarding the two questions I outlined in the OP: (a) whether such a list should exist in the first place and (b) how much detail should be included in the list should it be implemented. 
Smithereens
Smithereens's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 502
2
2
4
Smithereens's avatar
Smithereens
2
2
4
I don't think the community stands to gain anything from airing dirty laundry. Explanation of a ban is only owed to affected parties, not every member on the site. Confidentiality is favourable here imo if you want less drama instead of more.
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@Smithereens
...if you want less drama instead of more.....
How did an Obamian { no drama } make it onto this forum? Just kidding ;--)

idio-ump drama queen who today admitted his "only good trait" was that he never ever drank beer.

He spoke the truth {  maybe partially } in the white house announcement to press/media.

If he has drank a beer or other alcoholic beverage in his life, then  it was a partial lie even when he has a freudian slip and speaks partial truth.



Vaarka
Vaarka's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 696
2
1
5
Vaarka's avatar
Vaarka
2
1
5
-->
@bsh1
Banned users will be informed via PM prior to their banned. No user will be banned--with or without a list--without them having been given notice. So, that is not a reason in favor of a ban list, as I see it. 
What if the user does not log on to see the PM before their ban?

bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@Vaarka
I will wait until they have logged on before allowing the notice to take effect.
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@mustardness
Please don't clutter the thread with content entirely irrelevant to the subject at hand.
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@bsh1
Please don't clutter the thread with content entirely irrelevant to the subject at hand.
Sure thing Bsh1, sorry for my actions. Realized how off topic it was when I did it.  My error of judgement and willpower to do the right thing.

Im for less drama and agree with smitheens post #18. My apologies again.

bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
Last call for comments and feedback.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@bsh1
I am not comfortable with using public shaming as a punishment. That would be to legitimize personal attacks as a tool for moderators, when moderators prohibit other users from making personal attacks. 
+1

Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
Public shaming is needless word pollution, and it's not a punishment either to someone who actually has a life.  The practical function of a public ban list is to make every member aware so that the offender can be banned repeatedly as necessary when they try to come back.
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@Plisken
it's not a punishment either to someone who actually has a life
I disagree. Just because one has a life outside of the site is not to say that the site cannot play a meaningful role in one's life.

The practical function of a public ban list is to make every member aware so that the offender can be banned repeatedly as necessary when they try to come back.
I'm not sure what you're saying here, since it doesn't fall to the users to police other members and since users cannot unilaterally reactivate their account once it is blocked by me.
Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
-->
@bsh1
1.  It doesn't fall on users to police - Please don't forget to have fun!! You bsh1 are a user, and therefore the chief moderator (also you) is not the chief of police, good to know?  
2.  You are assuming I'm aware of the omniscient, omnipresent police force this website employs.  This would be a mistake, if not, a misrepresentation, assuming you are the same person who knows that I've pressed the little flag thingies before under the impression that relaying information to the powers that be was preferrable to more efficiently resolve issues for the community/user experience etc... particularily given the relatively limited tools members are allowed to employ themselves without appealing through admin.

3.  Public Shaming as Punishment - This is actually in my opinion a rather vile practice, in part because of the display of primative means to manipulate people through brainwashing and coercion in order to get what you want, but also because the people it can have an effect (resolving or not) are the most vulnerable.  Additionally, there aren't any means through this website to inform family members of such exposure.   

4. New introduction about role - Being a member of a website one would imagine plays some role in someone's life but you do not necessarily know what role that is. Assuming they have a life, they probably have more important things to worry about than what starfish22 expressed on "debateart.com" even if the person handling starfish22 contributes to a valued function in one's life.  They probably have an independant value system, and a set of relationships in which they interact with people and meet real friends through a medium in which its common to introduce oneself by name in honor.  The response to false assumptions over the diverse access through the internet could be anything from "meh" to "blub blub I'm a piranha" to  "challenge accepted".

Being a moderator, I'm confident you are quite enthusiastic about what this website has the potential to offer.  I'm equally confident that you feel shame on the basis of your personal views and your knowledge of why and how you did not do your best at the end of the day, not what starfish22 suggests @ngelbutt should think about you, but what you are rightfully concious and expect of yourself.


Plisken
Plisken's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 706
2
1
5
Plisken's avatar
Plisken
2
1
5
5.  The consideration of appropriate function in this setting was with respect to banishment only, nothing resembling an administrative practice of shunning.
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@Plisken
You bsh1 are a user, and therefore the chief moderator (also you) is not the chief of police, good to know?  
I am honestly not sure what you're trying to say here. The grammatical issues are making the meaning hard to extract. But, what I can say is that the mods are, for want of a better analogy, the police and the judges of the site. User may bring issues to the moderators attention, but it is not up to the usership to enforce site rules.

assuming you are the same person who knows that I've pressed the little flag thingies before
Reports are anonymous. I can only see who was reported, not who did the reporting. Nevertheless, I'm not sure how anything that you've said up to this point relates to the OP or to my previous response to your comment.

Public Shaming as Punishment - This is actually in my opinion a rather vile practice
I would naturally agree. I am not in favor of using public shaming as a tool to punish users, hence my previous posts and my opposition to a public ban list.

meet real friends
This assumes--falsely and rather naively--that friends made online cannot be real. If friendship is about building bonds through time spent together and through communication, I see no reason why friendship cannot be formed online in fora like these. Separately, to have a life outside the site does not imply that the site cannot matter to you. The extent to which it matters to someone will vary greatly, but the relationships formed and interactions undertaken on this site can and do have an effect on people's mental and emotional wellbeing. Humans are social creatures and we are impacted by how others perceive of and treat us; that is true whether online or off. It would be naive to suggest otherwise.

I'm equally confident that you feel shame on the basis of your personal views and your knowledge of why and how you did not do your best at the end of the day
Again, not really sure what you mean by that...

The consideration of appropriate function in this setting was with respect to banishment only, nothing resembling an administrative practice of shunning
My point, as articulated in various posts in this thread, is that a public list of banned members--the proposal under consideration here--would amount, in effect, to public shunning.