Suggestion Suspending people before banning them

BTW, I was definitely in favour of the pink one getting banned, in case anybody thinks I wasn't. The way he behaved towards @BayView was atrocious and deliberate—and creepy. As I said in my earlier post, I think the mods do a great job. It's just that sometimes a person can drop through the net. I was trying to find a way through—a way for us to recognise folks who have certain disorders (which they were born with and can't help having) so we can temper discussion reaction accordingly. I stand by that view.

 

@big soft moose - Of course some trolls might try to fake Asperger's. (And by the way, I just discovered I've been spelling Asperger's wrong! ) However, trolls often fake a lot of things, including indignation, various prejudices, misogyny, racism, you name it—just to get a rise out of people. Their purpose is to create disharmony, and they soon reveal their colours by being aggressive, taking stances they know will upset people, and sometimes targetting particular individuals, once they discover a 'weakness' or a favourite topic, or whatever. This is nothing like what a real Asperger's person is like.

Somebody with real Asperger's will struggle in social situations (and an online forum is a social situation, although it doesn't involve physical presence which might actually be reassuring to somebody with Asperger's.) This doesn't mean they are unpleasant or aggressive—in fact, quite the contrary. They are usually excessively polite, or they try to be. They just 'miss' stuff that the rest of us catch quite easily, and may struggle to change their own perceptions of what things should be like. If we know a person has this condition, we can be more forgiving if they don't take advice on board, or don't seem to understand what the advice is all about, or get frustrated when they don't understand what we mean. A person with real Asperger's will not behave like a troll. They are likely to be very self-absorbed with their own projects, and are NOT interested in making a move on other people.

Here's an article about adult Asperger's that I found interesting and helpful.

https://www.verywell.com/is-it-asperger-syndrome-259942

 

I agree with all of this. In the situation described here my son (who does have ASD) would have explained repeatedly (in black and white terms) why he couldn't change them, never would have manufactured other people, would not have deleted his posts, and would have walked away frustrated.

 

I'm glad that Ginger brought up this banning business. I don't think we can expect the administrators to know who is who, but I do wish that the forum would apply the same standard of behavior for those with us as those who've been banned - this would include trolls or suspected 'sock puppets'. It should not be okay for anyone who has passed through this forum to be called "wank puffins", "assholes" or "asshats". I just never thought this forum encouraged such behavior.

As for the deletion of posts by the person Jannert mentioned. How is this considered wrong? If the forum allows the delete function, then it can be used. If it's not allowed, then take away the function and people will behave accordingly. So if this poor guy felt terrible about how things went down and wanted to wipe it all away, I can't see why this should be considered another strike against him. He obviously felt he made a mistake engaging this forum and rectified it in a way he was permitted to do. I only half looked at the thread, but I remember feeling bad for him from what I did read.

I do enjoy reading the opinions on this forum and I would love the see more diversity without it being reduced to an argument. There seems to be a lot of crossed names lately and it becomes unsettling. I was surprised by Phil Mitchell's banning. I don't know him, but I always found his opinions interesting.

Note: @Wreybies, I'm sorry if it feels like I am criticising you, I have a great appreciation of the fact that your job is not easy. I know there is a lot of frustration too, but I've just been bothered by some comments lately.

(Also, I don't know why people are trying to validate if someone has a condition or not. It's a spectrum, meaning there's a range. Seems crazy to me people on the internet are actually even trying to do so, as if it justifies something. )

 

I liked Vinny's points, I like Wreybies' moderation. I understand @Moose's perspective, all such different mindsets.

 

I'm much more familiar with ASD (Asperger's doesn't technically exist anymore) than I want to be. But I don't think WF needs to change its attitude - people aren't banned for being socially awkward or any other traits that may come with ASD. That doesn't need to change.

 

Don't you not think the name calling also ruins the atmostphere? I still maintain that if we shouldn't call them names when they are here, I don't think we should be doing so when they're gone. But it's not me to play mother, I just wanted to note that I'm not okay with it. People will do whatever works for them and the admins will moderate accordingly.

Also, years ago, I was new to a forum and was accused of being a sock puppet. Apparently, my writing style was similar to that of a known troublemaker. It was a terrible experience, to be accused of being someone who posted people's home addresses and did horrible things. That writing forum was deep in witch hunt fever. I was eventually banned for denying their accusations vehemently. At the time I'd just had my twins and was very isolated. Forums was one of the ways I kept some social contact with humans. I was so traumatized by the sock puppet experience, I didn't get back onto writing forums for a few years. We can never really know who is sitting on the other end, so the public name calling feels unnecessary to me.

Well I can't remember the terms. I just go by what the interface allows for me to do. So if the permission for deletion is allowed, then it would seem reasonable for someone to think it's fine. I've always assumed people can regret posting an opinion, in his case, it was ALL his opinions. I don't find that so unforgivable. I was more concerned by why he was driven to do this. I just wanted to understand why this was such a terrible thing...to have regrets.

I understand this, and I would agree with your banning reason suggestion. Anyway, I'm gonna shut up now. I just wanted to register my opinions because it's been niggling at me. Now I will head off and live in peace (until next time).

 

As regards thread trashing: It is not permitted. Now, with that said, we cannot give members the ability to edit their posts (it is a writing site after all) that does not also open the ability to delete the content outright. It's just one of those things the staff has to keep an eye on. Ability is not permission. I have the technical and physical ability to commit an uncountable number of acts that are toootally against the law in the real world.

Summer Uptick of Bannings: Yes. It's a thing. Anyone who has ever modded or admined a forum knows of this phenomenon. For the Brits in the room, it's a wee bit like "TV Pickup". It happens and it happens everywhere. And it will happen again come November. There's no fun in it for us. We dread it. Not just dealing with the actual phenomenon, but also with all the side-eye aimed in our direction that it invokes. *shrug* It's just part of the job.

As regards the most recent banning: I have had to ban a few members in the past who actually had quite insightful things to add to the community. But there is an accounting that we have to make as moderators that gives rise to both sides of the complaint, the side that says we don't act quickly enough and the side that says we act rashly. When it's just a flat-out troll, that's easy, no one argues the removal of such a person, but when there is other constructive content, that's when it gets hard. I can't really know someone's intent unless they make it blatantly clear. I can only know the resultant effect on the community. That's the only hard data I have, so that's what I use. When disruption outweighs constructive engagement, the choice becomes clear, which is not the same as popular. And in the case of Phil, the choice was clear much earlier than when the banning was enacted but since I myself was a target of that person's disruption, I had to put that aside. I am not unquestionable, and I don't abide situations where the leadership or their reasoning is unquestionable or made to appear so, hence the fact that this very conversation is taking place where most forums forbid anything close to this topic. In the case of this particular member, a simple thread-ban was enacted, which is, in fact, even more lenient than the suspensions that started this discussion because it only restricts access to a single conversation in the forum, not the entire forum. The member PM'd us as to why, I explained, things very quickly devolved from there in the typically abrasive and caustic manner of this member's engagement.

I have banned popular members in the past, and so long as I remain an admin here, I will very likely have to do so again in the future. I don't have a crystal ball, but I would think it's pretty much guaranteed. The fact that there are members arguing both sides of this topic is itself a piece of useful data that tells me I am falling somewhere close to the middle, which is precisely where I should be.

 

Slow claps man. Slow clap.

The writer in me wishes I could think of some super purple prose to illustrate my next point. Yet I think the strongest words can often be simply ones.

"Thank you. Your presence is greatly appreciated and in many ways a positive life changing expierence."

Slow clap my friend.

 

The thread trashing rule is enforced a little selectively, though. I can think of two separate occasions when a poster deleted all his/her posts in a thread and I reported it and the posts stayed deleted and, to my knowledge, nothing else was done about it.

They were older threads, so maybe that's why it was allowed? But they did seem like strange exceptions to the rule. And the reason I noticed them was because I went back to the threads to try to use them as useful resources--which, as I understand it, is why we have the rule against deleting posts to begin with.

I'm sure there were reasons for not taking steps, but it does create some confusion about exactly what the rules are, or whether they apply to everybody.


ETA: Thanks for speaking up, @VynniL - I think these conversations too often become echo chambers with all the usual suspects having all the usual opinions. It was great to hear a new voice.

 

If I'm not mistaken (and correct me if I'm wrong, please) but the general use of any superlative is rather flipped in the U.K. compared to the U.S., where in the U.K. they are deployed more in irony than ever they are in their flat original meanings. No? Yes? Am I wrong?

 

I'm in the US, and where I am the slow clap thing is meant as an insult. I knew she didn't mean it that way, so I wasn't going to say anything.

 

@Wreybies - Thanks for the comprehensive response. I've only one question on thread trashing: are we allowed to journal trash? I'm already doing this, I didn't see the harm in it, but maybe I was mistaken. I see this as a tool for us to use as we wish to motivate us. I don't actually want a perma-record of my demented thoughts, whining and silly observations...I just need a place to purge and then get on with the writing. If this is also not permitted, it's no biggie.

 

We're not terribly concerned with Progress Journals, so let's call that the exception. It's a newer area and its dynamics are rather different. I think flexibility there is in order. Those threads can even be set so that the OP is the only one who has access to even see them, and as far as I am aware that's the only area in the forum that enjoys that feature. (See image below) Forgive me if I'm not more precise as to whether other areas have this feature (maybe the blogs do too?), it's just that as an admin those kinds of walls aren't present for me. I have to be aware of all things happening, so... you can see why. I'm not even afforded the privilege of putting members on ignore! That's a privilege you have that I don't. And again, for the same reason. Making problems invisible is not the way to deal with them.

 

I think everyone should be suspended for one day.
It would be sort of like when they take troubled teens to a prison, just to give them a taste of consequences.
Likewise, each of us should be given a turn at being a moderator, to better appreciate the heavy burden involved.

Y'all take the internet way too seriously.

 

Is it bad that I'm totally focused on the missing apostrophe, and I'm dying inside? Lack of caps I can live with, but....

 

Y'know, in my head it said "you are" - I didn't even register the contraction, much less that it was messed up. I can never look at this meme the same way again