Screw it . . .

[Blight]

I almost voted yes then I reread the poll. No, I?m not happy that he got banned but he knew it was going to happen as soon as he conceived what he really wanted to say. His actions were purposeful and direct; there was no alternative but to ban him. Kudos to him for having the balls to do it anyways; way to take one for the team. I actually see BE as one of the main causes for recent rule changes. I think personal attacks had to of have risen sharply after he joined. The political threads deserve their fair share of the blame as they have seemingly become a breeding ground for hatred and offensiveness. I?ll be glad when both situations are permanently past tense.

[Zagatto]

I agree that the comination of the arrival of BE and the rising tensions about tomorrows elections have everybody a little more sensitive than usual.

It's situations like this where I believe it is even more important than usual to remain civil. Given the number of positive reactions I've gotten from people I'm under the impression that what I've been doing is the right thing.

I've had a brief e-mail exchange with Vicious and he holds no ill will towards us and he did know that he was going to get banned for his post. Personally, I think he would have respected me a bit less if I hadn't banned him because then I would have been showing favouritism with the rules.

Either way, the election is nearly upon us and BE's ban still lasts for a little while longer. He may prove to be less than brilliant and earn himself a longer ban upon return. Only time will tell...

[multipak]

Had to be done, but I don't like it. This means if Vicious slips up one more time (distinct possibility), it'll be a 7-day ban next time. A 30-day ban after that, and then a permanent one. That would be a shame. He's a one-man party always waiting to happen.

I would like to point out the flow in Zagatto's banning scheme. Long bans disproportionately hurt established members like Vicious more, while they are potentially only a minor inconvenience for newbies. If someone is hell-bent on wreaking havoc on the board, I don't think any long bans will stop that. They can always create new names and come back. In fact, any extended bans will only encourage that practice.

Personally, I don't like any extended bans greater than a week. I would advocate for 3 day bans only. It's been effective in curbing the flame war. Wasn't that the purpose of the bans?

[WandererX12]

I don't know if the 3, 7, 30, perma-ban schedule is official or was only an idea, but I think multipak is on to something with only banning for 3 days.

If you come back after three days and the first post you make gets you banned again fine, ban you again in three more, just as easy as in seven. If you get yourself banned nonstop, then you probably can't say anything usefull in between. No one will miss you. Everyone wins. However if you come back post somthing worth reading, and contribute to the overall conversation, then you've shown that you learned a lesson. You step out of line you get a time out, you come back and everything's ok. But it you step out of line again and have your tounge cut out, we lose a tounge that, more often than not causes more good than harm. Vicious knew the consequences and said what he needed to say anyway. When he returns, I expect he'll go back to posting like normal, and not get banned in one post. When the time comes that he wants to rip into someone again, he can weigh it against a three day ban, same as anyone. If being away for three days is worth one venomous comment, then you either feel very strongly about the comment or you dont care about being here.

Wow that was hard, my mind is all over the place right now. Spelling and typing are tricky, forming an intelligible sentance even more so.

[Zagatto]

None of these rules are set in stone. What Multipak and Wanderer both said makes a lot of sense.

I started with the three day bans because they seemed the most reasonable balance at the time.
Whatever decision gets made, I want to keep things consistent for all members.
I would like to work out some sort of rules that allow Vicious to lay into a person from time to time (it's kind of fun to watch even if it's not polite) without ending up permanently banned. I don't like singling out users and I don't like the idea of the perma-ban...

[Cidien]

Not all people are equal = not all posters are equal = you should be a little flexible with your bans, you don't need to treat everyone exactly the same. Treating a reaction from Vicious and the crap BE posts as the same is just plain stupid in my opinion.

[Zagatto]

I have to go to work right now so you're spared a half page rant as to why I disagree with your point of view Cidien... I probably wont be back online again till tomorrow but look for my explanation to why I believe you are SOOOO wrong then.

[Andromeda18_]

None of these rules are set in stone. What Multipak and Wanderer both said makes a lot of sense.

I started with the three day bans because they seemed the most reasonable balance at the time.
Whatever decision gets made, I want to keep things consistent for all members.
I would like to work out some sort of rules that allow Vicious to lay into a person from time to time (it's kind of fun to watch even if it's not polite) without ending up permanently banned. I don't like singling out users and I don't like the idea of the perma-ban...

It's people like you and Vicious that make these forums interesting. If Vicious got permanently banned I really wouldn't like it and I would get genuinely mad which takes me back to the question you asked in 'Is Zagatto out of control with the bans? '. Would I stop coming here if someone like you or Vicious got permanently banned? Most likely!
So I really think you need to work on those rules of yours otherwise they're going to wreck more havoc than some of our members bad behaviour.

[rav96]

w0ot GO Vicious! The Voice of Reason (well most of the times) well im glad he spoke up! and seriuosly a permanenet Ban on viciuos would be a disaster..he is like the best part of this forum and him biting his lip lately ass he was doing was just plain ol' boring
if he were to be banned permaneent i doubt id be on the forum anymore though there are other coll peops i'd just get them on MSN and annoy them with my idiocy that way :p

[gohan32]

It's been a while since i was here. Glad i missed the Babyeater fiasco. As usual, me being a Vicious fan, i'm not happy to see him banned, but can totally see why. Gaiaonline has stolen me for a while....

[WandererX12]

Whatever decision gets made, I want to keep things consistent for all members.

I don't like singling out users and I don't like the idea of the perma-ban...

I think it's better to handle punishment on a case by case basis, but I understand that that is difficult. The amount of time and thought Zagatto or anyone else would need in oder to do that well is more than they should give. It's unfare to expect them to do so. That being so, the only other option is to treat everyone the same. In which case it's better to let those who deserve severe punishment off easy, than to overly punish those with minor infractions.

[Cidien]

I have to go to work right now so you're spared a half page rant as to why I disagree with your point of view Cidien... I probably wont be back online again till tomorrow but look for my explanation to why I believe you are SOOOO wrong then.

You disagree that all people are not equal? So you're telling me that me (or you for that matter) and those 20 or so lazy-ass indians that live next-door to my girlfriend sucking up my tax money through their unfair use of welfare are equal people? I don't think so.

I'll wait for your response and explanation before I go on a rant. =P

[rarnom]

Not all people are equal = not all posters are equal = you should be a little flexible with your bans, you don't need to treat everyone exactly the same. Treating a reaction from Vicious and the crap BE posts as the same is just plain stupid in my opinion.

I've got much love for you Cidien, and I see what you are trying to say, but I can't completely agree with this one either. If there is no consistency with the rules then everyone gets pissed and then there are double standards and that sucks. Even Vicious knew what he was getting himself into and he wouldn't expect to get a free ride from Zagatto just because he is Vicious. I think that in terms of the forum Zagatto needs to be the same to every member. I just think of it as the same way I deal with discipline in my classroom. If a rule is broken, then there is a punishment. No matter how good the kid is, if they break the rule I have to be consistent. And people ultimately have more respect for consistency rather than favoritism.

I however am always in favor of a free for all flame forum deal so then Zagatto can be consistent in the rest of the forum and just leave others to go nuts if they want to and those who want to stay out of it can stay out of it.

[Cidien]

I understand what you and Zagatto are saying too. Really I do, and it won't bother me one bit if Zagatto continues the way he is. However, I don't see any problem with treating someone like BE a little different simply because of the way he behaves. Or, just make a rule that people who obviously try to piss people off consistantly get perma banned, then you can be fair to everyone and still deal with people like BE.

[-spike-]

Isnt it true that criminals are treated differently depending on the serverity of the crime? I see this the same way, if some one here "commits the same crime" but the serverity of it is different, you should be able to determine what kind of ban they get.