I don't quite understand what I'm supposed to be upset with here. You've got a guy who stalks users and attacks the administration, and they ban him for a year, which kind of seems like a measured approach to be honest.
Some other admins didn't like that treatment and quit. So what? If you see that kind of behavior as something acceptable and the organization doesn't, maybe you shouldn't be there either.
There should probably be an open discussion on the forum engaging members and other moderators where the banned user can see it. Let them discuss the ban as well as the subsequent harassment and honor their decision.
I am a former admin of a large forum. I let trolls and spammers wear me down over years and regret that I did not handle some things openly.
For what? There was a ban given to a user, that user spammed all moderators of the channel and they told him to fuck off. Imagine you just shoved one out of a party and he is drunk and knocking on your door and screaming what do you do? You are not wanted in a community there is nothing to resolve. Get over it.
Well moderators are necessary to remove trolls. If your comments really were so trollish they felt the need to do that, I wonder why they didn't just ban you outright.
Thanks for giving some context. I really believe that if you are banning someone you should explain your rationale. Personal attacks are not good and if that email is to be believed then it certainly seems like a justified decision. Hopefully the moderators will be able to improve on the optics of their decisions in the future.
Getting banned without warning is harsh. Mods here uses it as a last resort. I say this as someone who has formerly triggered warnings around here: appealing to rationality, shared goals, and positive intent can work wonders in some cases.
Without context the bans could very well have been warranted.
I'm going to divulge my experience; I am the closest thing to "god" to a small IRC community, I could ban with impunity- but why would I do that? It only serves to either stroke my e-peen of how much power I have (thus- making people dislike you and more willing to go somewhere else) - or I have a legitimate grievance.
There are people in this world that when you try to treat them charitably, if you have some perceived authority over them they do _not_ see you charitably. There are people who /really/ wish to test the bounds of tolerance and patience and there are those who are e-masochists, genuinely trying to illicit bans and grovel about it (if you unban, then they do the same thing again or worse despite claiming they would not).
SO, my position towards the author is one of skepticism, Reddit does indeed have over-zealous moderation in some forums, I really don't doubt that- but if you're a mod of a popular sub and you hand out bans so liberally then eventually you'll push people to another subreddit or platform. Entrenchment to a subreddit basically doesn't happen because it's so easy to pop up something new.
Because I've done it. It is not necessary to put up with people rule-lawyering and concern trolling just because you're very clear on why people were banned.
reply