Important Going Forward

[The Mandarin]

That might include a lot of the current staff, in fact you might say that anybody who was staff under her was affiliated with her to some degree. So I wouldn’t quite go that far, but I do think it would only be fair and just to reverse all permanent bans.

She said the following:

LOL! "It wasn't a boneheaded decision", yeah no, screw that and the mods who helped the former owner sabotage the Sietch as its obvious it means quality posters were targeted on purpose. I guess you guys should get to unbanning everyone then as the conduct of the staff at the time is suspect.

 

[ShieldWife]

LOL! "It wasn't a boneheaded decision", yeah fuck that and the mods who helped the former owner sabotage the Sietch as its obvious it means quality posters were targeted on purpose. I guess you guys should get to unbanning everyone then as the conduct of the staff at the time is suspect.

Well, it’s obviously pretty bad. I can’t blame all of the moderators here, in fact I know some of them and they’re good.

If I owned the Sietch, I would do things a bit differently than Zoe did, that goes without saying. Probably different from the Boot too, but I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. The ban reversal, or lack there of, will have a major impact of my opinion of the Sietch and its future.

 

[SuperS4]

LOL! "It wasn't a boneheaded decision", yeah fuck that and the mods who helped the former owner sabotage the Sietch as its obvious it means quality posters were targeted on purpose. I guess you guys should get to unbanning everyone then as the conduct of the staff at the time is suspect.

Youre just as welcome to leave. Since all you do is seemingly bitch about the place. You act like you're super invested in a site that you seemingly only joined a little while ago. Oddly enough, shortly after a bunch of trolls get banned, you, an even bigger troll miraculously appears. Odd that.

Blanket amnesty is stupid. Tough shit that some trolls got banned for being dumb trolls who couldn't stop breaking the sites rules and ToS. They knew precisely what they were doing, and eventually it caught up with them. Boo fucking hoo.

I'm fine with amnesty for current members as far as the potential politics forum rules are concerned. I'm not sure these new rules will do much to foster healthy discussion personally. Given the issue isn't the rules, but those who seemingly think they either don't apply to them, or simply don't accept that rules exist in the first place to limit their speech. We would likely just be back to the same point in the end. The people who can handle it like adults without losing their shit still being able to post there. And those who can't, not being able to. This at most, attempts to add a second layer to holding them accountable. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn't.

 

[GoldRanger]

Ideally, I'd wish there was a place for the "screeching monkeys", so to speak, to shout among themselves about election and general political events, with little restriction and minimal oversight, and another place to discuss events calmly. Sometimes, I just want to vent, while other times I just want to calmly discuss present and potential future events without the one-line hysteria posts constantly getting in the way, and I don't see either as wrong. No idea how to implement something like that though.

Furthermore, the staff's insistence on closely policing the flow of conversation is a bit bizarre. Yeah, some threads will get more heated than others. As long as the site as a whole is not legally implicated, why care?

 

[GoldRanger]

Youre just as welcome to leave.

SuperS4, I respect you personally, but your behavior on the Sietch has been trollish so far, to say the least. This same advice is also true for you.

You've expressed in the past that you are not invested in this place in any way. Why should someone who IS invested, emotionally, in terms of history and possibly even monetarily, listen to you?

Blanket amnesty is stupid. Tough shit that some trolls got banned for being dumb trolls who couldn't stop breaking the sites rules and ToS. They knew precisely what they were doing, and eventually it caught up with them. Boo fucking hoo.

The previous owner of the site has explicitly stated that she basically banned them out of spite. So this entire paragraph comes off as completely removed from reality.

Look, some of the guys that were banned were idiots, and I'm not exactly shedding a tear now that I don't need to see them shitting up some of the political threads. But I don't necessarily think permanently banning them is warranted. Whomever doesn't like what they have go say can always use the ignore function, like I often do.

Also, your tone is way more aggressive than necessary. Take a breath. Have a drink.

 

[The Mandarin]

ablublublublub

Ideally, I'd wish there was a place for the "screeching monkeys", so to speak, to shout among themselves about election and general political events, with little restriction and minimal oversight, and another place to discuss events calmly. Sometimes, I just want to vent, while other times I just want to calmly discuss present and potential future events without the one-line hysteria posts constantly getting in the way, and I don't see either as wrong. No idea how to implement something like that though.

One could have a public, serious section for politics and current events with semi formal rules and then a much more wild hidden section that you accept comes with almost no rules excepting the glaringly obvious ones and the legal no-no's

Furthermore, the staff's insistence on closely policing the flow of conversation is a bit bizarre. Yeah, some threads will get more heated than others. As long as the site as a whole is not legally implicated, why care?

Serious business, the internet.

 

[ShieldWife]

Blanket amnesty is stupid. Tough shit that some trolls got banned for being dumb trolls who couldn't stop breaking the sites rules and ToS. They knew precisely what they were doing, and eventually it caught up with them. Boo fucking hoo.

As GoldRanger said, considering the fact that Zoe actually said that she was trying to kill the forum, the permanent bans that happened as a result of those polices should be assumed to be unjust. Not reversing them would be condoning the attempts to sabotage the Sietch, it would set a very bad precedent.

If the banned people are really that bad, they will likely engage in bad behavior in the future that they can be more objectively judged on.

 

[Urabrask Revealed]

Yyyeah, looking at Zoe's statement, I agree with the others that all bans should be undone. If they try to pull further bullshit, then they can take a timeout. Once they hit a certain limit, they go permanently. But what Zoe did, was scummy.

 

[Lord Sovereign]

Christ, I didn't hear that about Zoe.

Yup, blanket amnesty is a good idea. If those pardoned individuals come back and make a big stink, ban them to your heart's content. However, given the absolute shenanigans of 2020's later half, the benefit of the doubt is fair.

 

[Spartan303]

Ideally, I'd wish there was a place for the "screeching monkeys", so to speak, to shout among themselves about election and general political events, with little restriction and minimal oversight, and another place to discuss events calmly. Sometimes, I just want to vent, while other times I just want to calmly discuss present and potential future events without the one-line hysteria posts constantly getting in the way, and I don't see either as wrong. No idea how to implement something like that though.

Furthermore, the staff's insistence on closely policing the flow of conversation is a bit bizarre. Yeah, some threads will get more heated than others. As long as the site as a whole is not legally implicated, why care?

One of the ideas I had was for curated debates. Or closed Debates that were open for viewing. Essentially you'd have three people arguing for one side and three for another. The OP Author could either be a participant or act as a debater Moderator. Everyone is welcome to view the debate but no one can respond besides those that came in to the debate. Higher standards for debate would also be present.

The problem is, I'm not sure if the software is capable of doing that. And even then few people have the patience for these kinds of debates on the Left and the right. So this might be a moot point, but I felt the need to put it out there.

 

[Free-Stater 101]

As GoldRanger said, considering the fact that Zoe actually said that she was trying to kill the forum, the permanent bans that happened as a result of those polices should be assumed to be unjust. Not reversing them would be condoning the attempts to sabotage the Sietch, it would set a very bad precedent.

If the banned people are really that bad, they will likely engage in bad behavior in the future that they can be more objectively judged on.

Your wrong on one account here, Zoe stated her shutting down of the politics sub-forum was intended to kill the site, as far as I know though the previous attempts were genuinely made to clean the place up for better or worse.

 

[S'task]

Christ, I didn't hear that about Zoe.

Yup, blanket amnesty is a good idea. If those pardoned individuals come back and make a big stink, ban them to your heart's content. However, given the absolute shenanigans of 2020's later half, the benefit of the doubt is fair.

Given some of the bans put in place in the last few months were over broader issues, I doubt there will be an actual blanket amnesty. But a review is probably in line.

 

[Arch Dornan]

Aww shit even the lewd news thread's locked.

 

[Terthna]

Given some of the bans put in place in the last few months were over broader issues, I doubt there will be an actual blanket amnesty. But a review is probably in line.

Problem is, it may be impossible to contact some of them even if you do decide to rescind their ban.

 

[GoldRanger]

Problem is, it may be impossible to contact some of them even if you do decide to rescind their ban.

Just send them PMs. If they notice then they notice (maybe they have email notification on), if not then tough shit.

 

[The Mandarin]

Yyyeah, looking at Zoe's statement, I agree with the others that all bans should be undone. If they try to pull further bullshit, then they can take a timeout. Once they hit a certain limit, they go permanently. But what Zoe did, was scummy.

An act of complete hatred towards one's own userbase and petty self harming vandalism should never be rewarded and those still loyal should be shown the door. They're a threat to the future prospects of the site, frankly and quality users however triggering must be allowed to return.

Just send them PMs. If they notice then they notice (maybe they have email notification on), if not then tough shit.

Messenger services maybe?

Given some of the bans put in place in the last few months were over broader issues, I doubt there will be an actual blanket amnesty. But a review is probably in line.

How gracious of you, after framing users and banning them in the interest of vandalism.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

The only amnesty I'd advise against would be Lord Inviticus givin that the nature of his Ban seemed to be as a result of Law enforcement advice as opposed to a mere disagreement. Aside from that I don't see what would be wrong with a clean slate. If People are really in here to cause trouble they'll give themselves enough rope without the need of political drama.

 

[The Mandarin]

The only amnesty I'd advise against would be Lord Inviticus givin that the nature of his Ban seemed to be as a result of Law enforcement advice as opposed to a mere disagreement. Aside from that I don't see what would be wrong with a clean slate. If People are really in here to cause trouble they'll give themselves enough rope without the need of political drama.

"On the advice of law enforcement" is one of the worst things you can read on an internet forum. It always means either, the person in question did something that was so severe and so extreme that it warrants the humiliation of reporting an internet slap fight to the Police or that the moderators on the site are mentally unstable and you should run for your life. I guess, since this place isn't a ghost town it was the first thing and not the second. So fuck that guy I guess.

 

[Urabrask Revealed]

"On the advice of law enforcement" is one of the worst things you can read on an internet forum. It always means either, the person in question did something that was so severe and so extreme that it warrants the humiliation of reporting an internet slap fight to the Police or that the moderators on the site are mentally unstable and you should run for your life. I guess, since this place isn't a ghost town it was the first thing and not the second.

If you want to know the story behind LI's ban and deletion, give me a PM. I can tell you the braodstrokes.

 

[Vaermina]

What's with all the Deleted Members?