View Single Post
Old 09-24-08, 11:42 AM
  #269  
skinny
Senior Member
 
skinny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 821
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Siu Blue Wind
Just FYI. That thread was borne from members frequently asking why someone was banned and asking for details starting threads demanding the reasons. Sometimes there were several threads regarding the same member. Although the details aren't really given, the reason and length of time is given. It truly wasn't meant for shame but it seems the questions and new threads asking why have stopped. It also helps in other ways too. For example. In the beginning, we were getting complaints regarding "Rick Rolling" - the one that won't go away - and causing one to shut down their computer entirely in order to get rid of it. This was causing issues at work (some people were in the middle of projects and lost what they were doing). With PMs and warnings about Rick Rolling, some continued to do so, and were temporarily banned for it. Now because members see that you can be banned for it, we very rarely get Rick Roll links. A sockpuppet is another account a banned member starts in order to come back before their ban time is up.
So..., why aren't actions with the moderators subject to the same transparency? I see an entire new forum, a community council, where red stars can participate in the direction of the forum, and where leadership is transferred to the forum members and moderators are the servants of and accountable to the red stars. I see this.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg
Carnac.jpg (74.8 KB, 2 views)
skinny is offline