More Clarification And Consistent Enforcement of the "Borderline NSFW" Rule

[Moved to Elsewhere 11,329]

Yeah, for me, I never post images of sexual stuff, but I do sometimes feel tempted to swear in a post to like get my point across. However, I'm not ever sure when too much is too much. Also, it is hard to tell what sexual images can lead to users being banned or threads being deleted. In my opinion, there should be some kind of filter option to choose whether or not you want to see or whether not a thread will allow sexual images. For example, it can be allowed for stuff like the cloppers only thread (now deleted) but leave that option up to the OP.

[Panne 1,342]

M'aiq, Ghostie... you're going to get this thread locked just because of your own personal arguement... please both of you shut up because I would enjoy this threads existence a little bit longer.

[ghostfacekiller39 23,857]

M'aiq, Ghostie... you're going to get this thread locked just because of your own personal arguement... please both of you shut up because I would enjoy this threads existence a little bit longer.

I don't want this thread to get locked either, bud This is something that can be truly beneficial to the forums and something that needs to be reviewed.

Edited July 17, 2014 by ghostfacekiller39

[Panne 1,342]

Yeah, for me, I never post images of sexual stuff, but I do sometimes feel tempted to swear in a post to like get my point across. However, I'm not ever sure when too much is too much. Also, it is hard to tell what sexual images can lead to users being banned or threads being deleted. In my opinion, there should be some kind of filter option to choose whether or not you want to see or whether not a thread will allow sexual images. For example, it can be allowed for stuff like the cloppers only thread (now deleted) but leave that option up to the OP.

I always have wanted a filter on this site! Just like on fimfiction. It follows the rule of i you don't want porn and adult stuff just leave the filter on and it will get like 99.99% of the things if tagged correctly. That would actually make it really easy, something is tagged wrong it gets deleted, easy as that.

[Dattebayo 2,850]

You left out some key details, such as the fact you posted the Nazi Rarity images with malicious intent and you left out the entirety of what you did in the Rarity Fan Club.

 

Yeahh, if you're going to side-step your own misdeeds to suit your own argument (which is a defense of yourself, btw) then I really can't say that your opinion matters much here. You left out so many things that there's no possible way you overlooked them.

 

Just thought I'd point that out, so later.

I posted what I did in the rarity fan club. I posted a single image of her as a zombie.

if your entire arguement is going to just resort to a character attack, then I'm done here. You have no argument, your opinion is more invalid than mine as all you want is some form of gratification. You don't care about the forums, and you left out a ton.

 

Good day sir, maybe once you grow up you can debate like an adult, untill then. Later.

I'm not gonna let this thread get shut down by some Mickey Mouse bullsh*t

Take it outside, the both of you

[Panne 1,342]

I don't want this thread to get locked either, bud This is something that can be truly beneficial to the forums and something that needs to be reviewed.

But, your personal grievance with him isn't exactly beneficial, go take this to PMs or something. When ever I want to talk personal with people I always go to PMs.

[M'aiq the Liar 5,804]

I'm not gonna let this thread get shut down by some Mickey Mouse bullsh*t

Take it outside, the both of you

I agree, his personal confritation is rather detrimental to the thread. I appologize for making it worse, I just felt like his entire anecdote was out of place, as he did not really call for reformation to the current rules, he just wanted some form of gratification due to another member recieveing a longer temporary ban than me, due to him posting more graphic content. Really, the entire thing has nothing to due with the issue raised at large, as it argues intent of the poster more than actual changes to the rules. It is not really beneficial to the forums at large, it is just a personal greviance.

 

 

 

And to stay on topic, I feel like a little more clarification of the near-NSFW would help alot. There are many cases were images that would have been removed by one moderator are left by another, and it would seem that just having a large scale meetings, and getting the moderators and admins all on the same mental page as for what constitutes near-NSFW would be benefical, and a cheap stop gap untill larger changes can be implimented.

[Dattebayo 2,850]

-snup-

Interesting post, guy. GG.

 

I rather like the second one, but can see where the problems would arise.

[Flutter's lover <3 8,204]

There's  a lot of inconsistency regarding punishments and stuff. 

 

A 7 day suspension for a first time offence? but a 2 day suspension for a repeat offender? That doesn't make any sense. There's no logic there. Repeat offender should've gotten the 7 day suspension or whatever, meanwhile the first time offender should've just gotten a slap on the wrist and maybe a 2 day suspension, saying don't do this again, since he was just trying to raise awareness for animal cruelty. And the other was trolling in an atrocious manner.

 

There needs to be a little bit more consistency in the way things are handled. I get mods and admins are just doing their jobs, and it can be a bit of a burden. I know it's tough giving someone you know/are friends with a warning, or even a ban. Factoring in things like friendship can make things hard. But if you give members too long of a leash, they'll think they can do anything, and have no negative repercussions.

 

I've never had WPs before, but I've gotten a couple verbal warnings...

 

One for being off topic by posting a silly image in the wrong thread.. Another bypassing the the character limit filter(This was back when there was one on certain boards). Both being in the first week or so of posting, and those were totally fair, albeit the character limit one was a bit silly.

 

I've also got a PM before about a previous signature image I had, being BLNSFW, an Admin removed it, edited for me and lemme put it back up. Which was pretty awesome.  Another time, I got a PM about a silly troll topic in the Forum Lounge, about the title being BLNSFW, even though what was inside was completely SFW and of a humorous nature. The mod who PMed me and removed it even told me he had a chuckle reading it. Yet other staff members brohoof'd the topic. 

 

It's all inconsistent. If another mod/Admin had seen my Signature image, or if that Mod was in a bad mood about my silly troll topic, I might've gotten warning points for it. But I didn't.It's just a matter of opinion.

 

I get we're all human. Emotions can play a part in decision making....Even group decisions as staff. But There needs to be some sort of consistency.

 

 

 

 

 

The first solution is to remove the discretion from those people's hands.  This is what my old forum did. The way we handled rule violations is that we had a chart with every punishment based on the number of times you had violated that particular rule.  Nothing else was taken into consideration, the moderators just plugged your violation into a chart, and it came out with the punishment.  For example, on that forum, harassing a member resulted in a 7 day block the first time you did it, 14 day block the second time, 1 month block the third, and a permanent ban the fourth.

 

 

Maybe implement something similar to this? But a not as of strict one. Perhaps, maybe if the member hasn't gotten any warnings for "X amount of time" one gets wiped off of their records. If they continue good behaviour, maybe they eventually have a clean record. BUT if they do something terribly drastic, then perhaps reinvoke previous warnings and give additional ones? *shrugs* just an idea of sorts.

 

Anyways....that's my 2 cents on the topic.

Edited July 17, 2014 by :Flutterdash:

[Simon 4,554]

Yeah, for me, I never post images of sexual stuff, but I do sometimes feel tempted to swear in a post to like get my point across. However, I'm not ever sure when too much is too much. Also, it is hard to tell what sexual images can lead to users being banned or threads being deleted. In my opinion, there should be some kind of filter option to choose whether or not you want to see or whether not a thread will allow sexual images. For example, it can be allowed for stuff like the cloppers only thread (now deleted) but leave that option up to the OP.

 

 

I always have wanted a filter on this site! Just like on fimfiction. It follows the rule of i you don't want porn and adult stuff just leave the filter on and it will get like 99.99% of the things if tagged correctly. That would actually make it really easy, something is tagged wrong it gets deleted, easy as that.

There are a lot of issues with a filter system.  First of all, unless you have a way of preventing minors from using that filter, you have to worry about all the implications of minors being able to access adult content on the forum.  Plus it really changes the feel of the forums to have nsfw content on it.  And the biggest problem is that it's really hard to implement on a forum like this... if the filter system is done on a per thread basis, then you're going to have the problem of people posting nsfw content in threads that were never intended to be filtered.  For example, what happens when people start posting NSFW stuff in the fan clubs?  Do you delete the posts and end up back at this same issue we're having now, or do you filter the thread out as NSFW and make it so all the people who were active in that fan club have to have the filter disabled to view it?  But, if you do it on a per post basis, then you have the problem of threads not making any sense because if you have the filter enabled there will be missing posts all over.

 

The only way that would work is to have a separate forum section for 18+ stuff, and then you're still going to have these problems because you have to try and figure out what to do with borderline nsfw posts in the normal section of the forum. 

Edited July 17, 2014 by Simon

[Panne 1,342]

There are a lot of issues with a filter system.  First of all, unless you have a way of preventing minors from using that filter, you have to worry about all the implications of minors being able to access adult content on the forum.  Plus it really changes the feel of the forums to have nsfw content on it.  And the biggest problem is that it's really hard to implement on a forum like this... if the filter system is done on a per thread basis, then you're going to have the problem of people posting nsfw content in threads that were never intended to be filtered.  For example, what happens when people start posting NSFW stuff in the fan clubs?  Do you delete the posts and end up back at this same issue we're having now, or do you filter the thread out as NSFW and make it so all the people who were active in that fan club have to have the filter disabled to view it?  But, if you do it on a per post basis, then you have the problem of threads not making any sense because if you have the filter enabled there will be missing posts all over.

 

The only way that would work is to have a separate forum section for 18+ stuff, and then you're still going to have these problems because you have to try and figure out what to do with borderline nsfw posts in the normal section of the forum. 

I swear you just shot down each counter argument I had in the order that I came up with them...

Edited July 17, 2014 by Ami Mizuno

[Dattebayo 2,850]

Also, IP Board doesn't support a filter system, IIRC

Edited July 17, 2014 by Dattebayo

[Shanks 10,811]

I know for a fact that the report for the gore pic in the Rarity Fan Club wasn't discussed because I talked about it with the staff for weeks and an admin told me recently that it was opened and shut and that the obvious context of the post in the RFC was likely missed by the staff member who handled it.

What dosen't sense to me is aren't all warning given placed into some kind of record that moderators have access to complete with the evidence of the puported incident? And I am fairly centain that moderators can view members warn history so I don't see how a screw up like this can go uncorrected, if there is really this big of an indiscrepency on such an important matter than what other things are there similar indiscrepencies over? I am not expecting perfection here as even moderators are human but you are honestly saying they told you that the moderator who handled it missed the context? I can understand how moderators may not see absolutely everything right away but this sounds like an even worse screw up than I thought.

 

 

My one beef is the "this is getting out of hand" excuses that has been used on so many clop threads. Even if everything is going well and there are no flame wars a moderator will swoop in and shut it down because it was "out of hand" or "will be soon". Even without anything NSFW being posted.

To be fair clop threads do have a history of flame wars, and people posting stuff that is a tad too far though I wouldn't be surprised if there were other examples of the inconsistency I am talking about in this thread. I have noticed that a lot of the action here happens at night and I go to bed fairly early so there are some things I miss.

 

 

Inherently, what is or is not appropriate is a subjective matter. Everyone has a different moral outlook on the world, everyone has a different level of tolerance for various behavior or material, and everyone responds to what they encounter in different ways. In light of this fact, I am highly skeptical that we would ever be able to design a borderline NSFW rule, or any rule for that matter, that would make everyone happy.

No, you can never make everyone happy but what can be done is to remove a lot of the confusion and frustration. This is why I think both the staff and the members should all talk about this, we can all learn from each other and come up with someone that maybe won't make everyone happy but will hopefully be an improvement. I actually was once a moderator on another site years and one thing I have learned in that experience is that if the users feel you are not listening to them and that you are merely brushing their concerns aside than that fosters resentment which can in some cases cause some members to lash out. Most of my experiences with moderation on here in including with you have been positive but one thing I have noticed is that some members feel that the staff is not listening to them and is merely "towing the line" so to speak in order to keep them quiet. While I don't believe that is the case at least not with all of the staff here I do believe that matters such as this do not help that perception.

 

 

 many people may not have the time or energy to read highly extensive rules and may not be able to remember all of them, resulting in unnecessary stress and complication.

That is true but it seems like excessive ambiguity such as in this case can also lead to the same problem. I do realize that we will not be able to list everything that could possibly be "borderline NSFW" but when there is this much confusion it is a problem to both the users as well as the staff.

 

 

Many people view that as evidence of bias, when in actuality it is not. It is the unfortunate fact of the matter that things will always slip through the cracks at times, because there is no way the moderation team could ever possibly see everything.

I understand moderators can't see everything on a site this huge but last years "most attractive pony tournament" was not only seen by moderators but some even actively participated in it. There is significant evidence that that particular thread was watched carefully by moderation especially after this "abusive behavior" incident when this one user started insulting fans of another pony because his candidate was losing.

 

 

I've done that before and let me tell you it doesn't work. I asked a mod and he was okay with the picture so then I posted it and another mod dropped in and removed it. At that point I didn't even feel like appealing for it so I just rolled over and gave up. I mean I could have told them that another mod okayed it but seriously it is just a hassle.

I would have PM'd the moderator that removed it and told him that the other okayed it myself but it does make me wonder how often this sort of thing happens. Maybe there is some kind of way that moderators can if they okay something keep a log of it in the "moderators lounge" or something just so they have a record they can come back to just in case there are anymore indiscrepencies like this.

 

 

 In my opinion, there should be some kind of filter option to choose whether or not you want to see or whether not a thread will allow sexual images. For example, it can be allowed for stuff like the cloppers only thread (now deleted) but leave that option up to the OP.

Some users have suggeted similar solutions to that like adding an age 18+ subforum for example but the problem with that is the staff has said that they are are not comfortable with doing that because user who are under 18 can easily lie their way in which presents all sort of headaches. As a matter of fact there was an incident on Red Light Ponyville which I am a member of and a member was recently banned for being under 18 which is not unusual. But what made that case particularly bad was that he posted a picture of his penis in the "Flaunt Your Dick Thread" which granted is in the hidden "Indecent Figures" section but still. And there are also concerns about potential damage to the reputation of this site as well among the staff. I enjoy this material but I still understand and respect the staff decision on that matter.

[Yellow Diamond 7,564]

I'm only going to say this once: everyone is free to discuss potential alternatives to the rules, but rehashing or challenging past warnings should be left to report tickets or PMs; furthermore, attacking each other is off-limits. Handle your personal grievances elsewhere, hopefully in a productive manner.

 

For the time being, I'm leaving some of the questionable posts in place. If it comes to my attention that members are fighting again, then expect punitive action. Strong opinions are no excuse for poor conduct.

 

---

 

The difficulty with setting out strict guidelines for Borderline NSFW content is that such content does not always have a clear marker. People often have different standards of what is acceptable, borderline, or an outright violation of decency; thus I'm disinclined to believe a strict definition, if it were possible to render, would settle the matter beyond dispute. There would always be the potential for a case in which a final definition could not effectively cover, and a judgment would need to be made on the spot.

 

The best answer I can provide at present is this: Borderline NSFW comprises content which is made in poor taste and is inappropriate for general audiences. Someone might consider "Grammar Nazi" inappropriate, as it makes a comparison to a deplorable regime; on the other hand, general consensus -- and this where things get fuzzy -- is that the phrase is doesn't raise any offensive red flags in and of itself. If one were to start posting pictures of ponified Hitler, however, that would constitute inappropriate content. Posting photographs of corpses from concentration camps or mutilated animals would likely net a full NSFW warning.

 

In the end, though, we're caught between a rock and hard place. Someone might just find ponified Hitler funny and therefore not inappropriate. And posting lists of examples would invariably leave gaps for people question. ("Why is X subject considered borderline when Y is allowed?") Here we tread into the need for interpretation -- and though the current staff is far from perfect, its deliberations are rarely if ever made in undo haste.

 

Generally speaking, a member will receive a PM about such content, unless said content is considered outright NSFW or if the member in question has a history of ignoring the rules. We also have PMs and the support ticket system. These are the fail-safes designed to help prevent difficult cases from going unaddressed.

 

Finally, even if you are upset with the current rules, please be respectful. It appears to be far too easy for someone to assume the staff is composed of soulless automatons who would like nothing better than to punish people. We really don't enjoy pestering people via PM or handing out warning points. Getting snarky with us only muddies the waters and undermines your position. We're not asking folks to get obsequious and butter us up with niceties -- but it's no fun reading through responses that effectively assert how wrong we are because we don't know how to enforce our own rules.

[Shanks 10,811]

The best answer I can provide at present is this: Borderline NSFW comprises content which is made in poor taste and is inappropriate for general audiences. Someone might consider "Grammar Nazi" inappropriate, as it makes a comparison to a deplorable regime; on the other hand, general consensus -- and this where things get fuzzy -- is that the phrase is doesn't raise any offensive red flags in and of itself. If one were to start posting pictures of ponified Hitler, however, that would constitute inappropriate content.

Someone might consider "grammar nazi" innapropriate but most people don't seem to take great offense to that so that would be something that I would leave alone. To be honest I think ponified Hitler actually is funny even though I am not a fan of the Nazi's but do understand why people don't want to see something like and why it dosen't belong here.

 

 

 Getting snarky with us only muddies the waters and undermines your position. We're not asking folks to get obsequious and butter us up with niceties -- but it's no fun reading through responses that effectively assert how wrong we are because we don't know how to enforce our own rules.

I can assure you that is not my intent at all, I don't want to make this "us verses them" thread I want to make this about all of us coming together and talking about a situation that I believe is far less than ideal and needs to be discussed more between the users and staff. What you said about not re hashing past warnings and stuff like that is why I was so careful when I wrote this by not naming names and checking in with Artemis who is an admin I greatly respect and trust to go over what I am saying before I posted it so I didn't inadvertantly break any rules or maybe say anything that might be wrongfully misinterpreted as me just trying to stir up trouble. I don't want this thread derailed and I do want this to remain respectful and am not intended to be snarky and don't want anyone else to be snarky.

[Yellow Diamond 7,564]

Someone might consider "grammar nazi" innapropriate but most people don't seem to take great offense to that so that would be something that I would leave alone. To be honest I think ponified Hitler actually is funny even though I am not a fan of the Nazi's but do understand why people don't want to see something like and why it dosen't belong here.

 

I'm sure you've encountered one or two people who claim to be offended by the simplest things. It happens, and we're often left to deal with it.

 

Suffice it to say that my point was a simple way of exemplifying how nebulous borderline cases are by their very nature. I would think "borderline" would in fact imply a lack of clear guidelines.

 

Also, I wasn't accusing you of being snarky or rude, Prodigy. Your post was respectful and to the point. I was more responding to the general attitude held by some that challenging the rules is an excuse to snap at the moderators. I'm want to cut mean spirited responses off at the pass.

[King 5,625]

 

 

I get what you're saying, but the inconsistency in punishment in too glaring for action not to be taken and this remain a fairly run community. Like, the Rarity Fan Club/Dog awareness scenario presented in the OP. How is that even fair?

I'd like to think we still are a fairly run community. We have multiple moderators and admins who decide upon punishments rather then having a single person do so, this means that a general consensus is made as to what could be appropriate. This isn't what the issue is.

The issue could be that we need to be less strict on first time offenders (unless its a serious offence) and stricter on repeat offenders.

Personally this is the approach I've always tried to take, I feel that we're all capable of screwing up. We're all human and thats not exactly about to change any time soon. Hell, even I have a warning for Off-Topic from like, 14 months ago

 

A mod shouldn't be able to "Take the law into their own hands" That is corrupt,

I can assure you this doesn't happen, as some people think it might. All reports are discussed between a number of mods before action is taken and the only time in which a mod can take immediate action is when something is very clearly cut. Someone spamming porn or gore with hostile intent is going to get banned, no question about it.



We aren't perfect. No one has the right to ask us to be. We do however try our hardest to create a system that's both fair and appropriate to help keep the site enjoyable for the majority of people. We will never satisfy everyone, that is a fact.

But we aren't a corrupt power hoarding bunch of over zealot monsters that some users have made us out to be in the past. I know for a fact that each member of the mod and admin team are passionate about this community. They joined staff because they wanted to serve the site in some way.

We recognise the fact that we wont ever be viewed as normal members again due to the fact we have to enforce rules. This happens with all types of law enforcement, whether it be outside world, or online.

We accept that, we also accept the inevitable hate and comments we get both behind our back and in our face.

We accept that it's likely we'll burn out and drop of the site once we've been here a certain time.

We accept that we have to do work on the site rather then it purely being a fun, sociable gathering of minds.

As I said, we aren't perfect, but we don't try and fuck people over like some members think. We legitimately want to make this an enjoyable and safe environment for people to hang out.


 

[Jeric 46,835]

I agree with @Simon on the difficulties and pitfalls of implementing a content filter. It would also impact the readability of topics since users may natural use images to complement their text. Then you have the limitations of the software.

 

Has IPB created the oft requested 'shadow ban' feature, yet? I still believe a temporary ban (or shadow ban in that ever made it in as a feature) while a second set of eyes to confirm or support the decision would go a long way. Again, every board makes these decisions differently and I agree that the staff wants to make sure that there is enough leeway so you don't feel you need to make a compulsory decision, but a second set of eyes couldn't hurt the decision process.

[Dattebayo 2,850]

The difficulty with setting out strict guidelines for Borderline NSFW content is that such content does not always have a clear marker. People often have different standards of what is acceptable, borderline, or an outright violation of decency; thus I'm disinclined to believe a strict definition, if it were possible to render, would settle the matter beyond dispute. There would always be the potential for a case in which a final definition could not effectively cover, and a judgment would need to be made on the spot.

 

The best answer I can provide at present is this: Borderline NSFW comprises content which is made in poor taste and is inappropriate for general audiences. Someone might consider "Grammar Nazi" inappropriate, as it makes a comparison to a deplorable regime; on the other hand, general consensus -- and this where things get fuzzy -- is that the phrase is doesn't raise any offensive red flags in and of itself. If one were to start posting pictures of ponified Hitler, however, that would constitute inappropriate content. Posting photographs of corpses from concentration camps or mutilated animals would likely net a full NSFW warning.

 

In the end, though, we're caught between a rock and hard place. Someone might just find ponified Hitler funny and therefore not inappropriate. And posting lists of examples would invariably leave gaps for people question. ("Why is X subject considered borderline when Y is allowed?") Here we tread into the need for interpretation -- and though the current staff is far from perfect, its deliberations are rarely if ever made in undo haste.

 

And where is the line drawn for BNSFW picture of a "sexual" nature?

How does one decide what pushes the boundaries of taste in that?

 

I'm only going to say this once: everyone is free to discuss potential alternatives to the rules, but rehashing or challenging past warnings should be left to report tickets or PMs; furthermore, attacking each other is off-limits. Handle your personal grievances elsewhere, hopefully in a productive manner.

 

What better way to highlight a system that needs fixing, than by posting examples of times people got burned for ambiguous content?

People sharing these experiences will undoubtedly only further the argument of a clearer guideline.

 

Not snarkyly.

 

Generally speaking, a member will receive a PM about such content, unless said content is considered outright NSFW or if the member in question has a history of ignoring the rules. We also have PMs and the support ticket system. These are the fail-safes designed to help prevent difficult cases from going unaddressed.

 

Fail safes that I, for example, did not receive.

No warning my post was removed, no stern talking to, just BAM. 250 warning points for a picture that was, even if you (generally) were the most sensitive man on Earth, is at most, PG-13 hand that's pushing it).

 

Further highlighting the inconsistencies that would be eased by some sort of reform.

 

Respectfully.

[Rainblow H. Ash 5,090]

Has IPB created the oft requested 'shadow ban' feature, yet? I still believe a temporary ban (or shadow ban in that ever made it in as a feature) while a second set of eyes to confirm or support the decision would go a long way.

 

If IPB ever creates a shadow ban feature, I'm not sure if I'll continue to use this forum if implemented. I despise shadow banning. It is an underhanded tactic and can be abused. Temporary bans and warning points to me are fine forms of punishment, shadow banning makes it so that a user can get punished and not even know what they did to deserve it and that's ridiculous, even for a repeat offender.

[Shanks 10,811]

Temporary bans and warning points to me are fine forms of punishment, shadow banning makes it so that a user can get punished and not even know what they did to deserve it and that's ridiculous, even for a repeat offender.

Yikes, that sounds really authoritarian. I am really really glad that is not how things work around here.

[Rainblow H. Ash 5,090]

Yikes, that sounds really authoritarian. I am really really glad that is not how things work around here.

 

It is very authoritarian. Making it so that a person can post and put out status updates and no one even sees them and the user doesn't realize it is just wrong. It silences them without their knowing, and makes it so they might think everyone is just ignoring them. It doesn't work and is an ineffective mode of punishment in my opinion.

 

We don't need to resort to shadow banning to sort out the simple issue of consistent enforcement of rules and handling of repeat offenders and the amount of time they get for temporary bans.

[ghostfacekiller39 23,857]

If IPB ever creates a shadow ban feature, I'm not sure if I'll continue to use this forum if implemented. I despise shadow banning. It is an underhanded tactic and can be abused. Temporary bans and warning points to me are fine forms of punishment, shadow banning makes it so that a user can get punished and not even know what they did to deserve it and that's ridiculous, even for a repeat offender.

I actually would agree. Shadowbanning is just a dick move, and if this forum starts doing that, I'd log out for the last time myself. You can just permaban someone and not give them the feelings of being despised and alone that shadowbanning would create. That's just abusive.

 

Just permaban someone if you want to shadowban.

Edited July 17, 2014 by ghostfacekiller39

[Jeric 46,835]

It is very authoritarian. Making it so that a person can post and put out status updates and no one even sees them and the user doesn't realize it is just wrong. It silences them without their knowing, and makes it so they might think everyone is just ignoring them. It doesn't work and is an ineffective mode of punishment in my opinion.

 

We don't need to resort to shadow banning to sort out the simple issue of consistent enforcement of rules and handling of repeat offenders and the amount of time they get for temporary bans.

 

True the potential for going a little overboard exists, I was only thinking about it being used for a few hours at most so that it could be determined if further disciplinary function is needed. reddit uses a similar system (or used to ... not sure if it still is), and I know it's despised for the very reasons you mentioned. I wouldn't think the mods would exploit the function.

[Rainblow H. Ash 5,090]

True the potential for going a little overboard exists, I was only thinking about it being used for a few hours at most so that it could be determined if further disciplinary function is needed. reddit uses a similar system (or used to ... not sure if it still is), and I know it's despised for the very reasons you mentioned. I wouldn't think the mods would exploit the function.

 

Yes, I know of shadow banning from reddit, and it's still used to this day. That's the exact reason it shouldn't be used here. I'm sure it was started with good intentions as you mentioned, but even the most well-intentioned moderators can exploit a system and think nothing of it.

 

It shouldn't be implemented. There are better ways. We're all people, let's sort things out without resorting to implementing that function, even if temporary shadow bans seem like a good course of action, I just don't want any part of that system on this site. My threat to leave isn't a threat toward anyone here, it's just a personal choice I'd make if it was indeed implemented.