2004-06-26, 19:04 | Link #21 | |
Member of the Year 2004!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: "And if thou doest not well, _Sin_ lieth at the door."- Genesis 4:7
Age: 39
|
Quote:
|
|
2004-06-26, 19:23 | Link #22 |
Weapon of Mass Discussion
Fansubber
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York, USA
|
That would fail the purpose of making the system more open and accountable. One of the merits of the idea is that everyone can easily see why we do the things we do. It removes the feeling that we are banishing people in secret after convening in a Star Chamber.
I'm aware from feedback I've gotten that some people really do feel that way about us.
__________________
|
2004-06-26, 19:29 | Link #23 | |
Member of the Year 2004!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: "And if thou doest not well, _Sin_ lieth at the door."- Genesis 4:7
Age: 39
|
Quote:
|
|
2004-06-26, 23:52 | Link #24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Athens, Greece
Age: 41
|
Still. It is better for normal users not to have access at all. Full access to banned users and mods is the best solution.
Another solution is to leave things as they are, they are working fine so far so why mess with them?
__________________
|
2004-06-27, 02:26 | Link #26 | |
Coordinated Insanity
|
Quote:
No, I'm pretty sure he meant "Mess". Is "Informative" your new word of the day or something? You get banned, they send you a PM and say what you did wrong in the thread itself. What's the point of other people knowing why some people got banned? So they don't do that themselves? What's wrong with reading the rules instead of having some sort of "hall of shame" list of people that were banned? It sounds more like it'd be for entertainment purposes rather than as how you say,"informative". |
|
2004-06-27, 03:29 | Link #27 | |||
Banned
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
2004-06-27, 04:11 | Link #28 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Athens, Greece
Age: 41
|
If all you guys want is a "hall of shame" forum then a closed sticky thread where bans are announced should be more than enough. There each ban can simply be a new post explaining why a person was banned and for how long.
On the other hand the last thing I want is to "glorify" any violators by honoring them that way.
__________________
|
2004-06-27, 06:52 | Link #30 | |||
Just call me Ojisan
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: U.K. Hampshire
|
These suggestions are not going to be implemented, there will be no forum, sticky or thread listing banned members.
As many people have already pointed out, it's generally a bad idea to glorify in any way trolls, spammers or members who have made a nuisance of themselves. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
2004-06-27, 07:06 | Link #31 | ||
Unfair
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
Quote:
By the way, your current signature is over the rule with a weight of 160.88 KB... -.-
__________________
|
||
2004-06-27, 07:57 | Link #32 | |
Member of the Year 2004!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: "And if thou doest not well, _Sin_ lieth at the door."- Genesis 4:7
Age: 39
|
Quote:
|
|
2004-06-27, 08:34 | Link #33 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Athens, Greece
Age: 41
|
Quote:
If somebody is banned it is for a good reason and not to please the twisted needs of a moderators to abuse other people(I leave my whip at home before coming here). I understand that in some cases that might not be clear at first as to why it happened to some people but in 99% of the cases it is quite resonable as we have all seen.
__________________
|
|
|
|