Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In with Google

Become a Subscriber!

Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!

Read more...

Did Sporky's hand slip on the ban-hammer?

What's Hot
1235»

Comments

  • ClarkyClarky Frets: 3261
    I think banning yourself is cool...

    I'd have banned me ages ago if I could..
    and I don't even know why..
    play every note as if it were your first
    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • TTonyTTony Frets: 27611

    UnclePsychosis said:

    I'm not asking for any specific moderation. Its up to the site owners to decide what actions to take. But they have to be prepared to actually take some kind of action against people who aren't capable of not breaching rule 1. 

    In the past, we've had "quiet words" when an individual post, or a general attitude, has been at risk of breaching the rules.

    In the vast majority of cases, we've had apologies, retractions, changed behaviour and - unfortunately - the very occasional resignation from the forum.  Sure, sometimes there are repeat offences/offenders and it would be most easy to ban those people.  Easy doesn't mean right.  It's harder for us (time, effort, diplomacy and being perceived to be doing nothing!) to keep working with them and getting them to change, but that approach is more in line with what we're trying to do here.

    In our view (sorry, but it does have to be subjective at some point), most of these situations have been "innocent" in that the person responsible hasn't deliberately set out to break a rule, be offensive, or to otherwise undermine the general ethos of the forum.  Agreed, the post/s may have been offensive in some way, but it wasn't generally done with malice aforethought with the intention of undermining the forum more generally.

    So, yes, perhaps I'm calling them ignorant, or less integrated into theFB society, or less aware of the impact that they were having - none of those are particularly complimentary - but we give the benefit of the doubt and assume innocence rather than malevolence or disruptive mischeviousness.

    There are situations in which the behaviours are not offset by innocence. 

    In those situations we are likely to act, and offenders can disappear into martyrdom if that's what they seek.

    Having trouble posting images here?  This might help.
    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • bertiebertie Frets: 13569
    edited October 2013
    Bollocks.
    this isnt the 'tell us an unusual fact about yourself'  thread
    just because you don't, doesn't mean you can't
     just because you do, doesn't mean you should.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • chillidoggychillidoggy Frets: 17136
    In that case I'll have to move my bollocks elsewhere.


    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
Sign In or Register to comment.