Permabans, your opinions.

[mrthejoshmon]

There is always a limit to what is tolerable, I've permabanned a lot of trouble makers myself after they push themselves to be intolerable.

[dew]

16 minutes ago, killer2 said:

Perhaps whenever they want to post a project they could talk to a moderator or another member of the community and have them post it on their behalf or something or letting them post directly but with all their posts needing moderator approval before being visible..

Okay, this is an important distinction to make. Doomworld only hosts a front for the actual /idgames archive. All of these banned people still can - and often do - upload their new projects. They just can't advertise on Doomworld anymore, because they forfeited that right by being shitters.

[Marcaek]

Allowing people to stick around just because they make good work is something I don't get, because then you're allowing yourself and a community to be held hostage to their whims.

[june gloom]

Yes, full stop. You want to make a place nice, you have to get rid of the jerks.

 

And Darknation was a jerk.

[Grazza]

I'll just drop one question in here. If someone sends 100+ messages to each member of the forum staff, saying "FUCK YOU" 5000 times, do you think they should be permabanned?

 

Just providing a little perspective on what kind of shit the staff have to deal with from some of these heroes.

 

[Megalyth]

Doomworld has gotten a bit more strict lately, but it doesn't really affect the majority of the members. As interesting and intelligent as some of the permanently banned members in question were/are, they had crossed many lines over and over again. I don't blame the mods and admins for simply sparing themselves more bullshit.

 

Edit:

Also, most of them were given chances to be civil and control themselves, usually after being losered many times. It's not like they were immediately dumped into the trash.

Edited December 9, 2017 by Megalyth

[Decay]

1 hour ago, Marcaek said:

Allowing people to stick around just because they make good work is something I don't get, because then you're allowing yourself and a community to be held hostage to their whims.

[killer2]

17 minutes ago, Grazza said:

I'll just drop one question in here. If someone sends 100+ messages to each member of the forum staff, saying "FUCK YOU" 5000 times, do you think they should be permabanned?

 

Just providing a little perspective on what kind of shit the staff have to deal with from some of these heroes.

 

    Not necessarely. If their behaviour was made with a sound mind, with the sole intent and purpose to make everyone involved feel like shit, then absolutely. If, however, it comes from somebody with deeply rooted psychological issues, then still yes, but not indefinitely. If this person were to contact me some time later and tell me they've undergone therapy or just got better at dealing with their emotions and mental state, I would be inclined to give them a second chance.

 

    I will admit however that I am biased in this. People in real life always tended to make me frustrated and angry, and I couldn't retaliate as there would be consequences. Therefore, when it would become unbearable I would search for someone online and just make their life miserable by any means I could. It made me feel good, like a release of all the bad thoughts and energy I had. But then I would "wake up" and see what I've done, and in the end if that person was still there the only thing I could say would be "I'm sorry" in every way I could, because ultimately, they did nothing wrong...and I didn't mean to say those things to them. It was like being in a trance, I would be aware of what I'm doing but not able to stop myself. 

    I don't do this anymore, and I know some people who do this don't actually mean to do it, it's more of an emotional and visceral reaction. I know it can get better and that it can be overcome, as I did it myself.

 

    I'm not sure if this is the kind of response you were looking for...I tried remaking this post several times as I had to deal with repressed memories, and it's gonna be rambly as hell...but here it is.

[42PercentHealth]

I was very tempted to say "no" here. The thing is, I have a friend who's been permanently banned for what I feel is too light of an offense. I also feel like he's learned his lesson and wouldn't spam pointless messages if given a second chance. However, I can think of hypothetical cases of people who would deserve a permanent ban.

[kb1]

I noticed that no one fessed up to this one: "Yes, except when the user is actively contributing great projects", though I imagine it plays a role.

 

What's Right

• The owner(s) have every right to do whatever they want on their site, without justification or warning.
• Banning someone who's breaking the law, or describing crimes they participated in, or describing how to commit an illegal act, is not only right, it's downright necessary, in most cases.
• Willingly breaking posted rules, and making no effort to avoid doing so, is being disrespectful - no question about it.

 

What's Fair

Being fair is not necessarily the right thing to do. Doing the right thing is not necessarily fair. Having said that:

Fairness is really not a factor. The site owner(s) are providing a free service, and are well within their bounds to demand what content appears on their site. Of course, if they are viewed as extremely "unfair", people may choose to go elsewhere.

 

Morally Speaking

Assuming that the goal is to have a relatively fair place for people to communicate, a few pointers may be worth noting:

• Many people on this site are fairly young, and are growing, mentally. As people grow, their priorities change, and they (hopefully) become wiser.
• Young people sometimes confuse annoying behavior as humor.

The biggest problem I have with the perma-ban is that there's no opportunity for those people to apologize to the community. It becomes one of those life lessons, full of regret. In a lot of cases, this is morally justified. In other cases, perhaps not so much.

 

The threat of perma-ban is, in many ways, similar to the threat of getting beat up in a real-life close proximity conversation. People say things online that they would never say to someone, face-to-face. Perhaps the online community would benefit, if everyone acted as if they were face-to-face with the people they talk to.

 

A final point: If we conduct yourself honestly and respectfully, we've done everything in our power to avoid being banned, and to improve the quality of the site's content and general vibe.

 

"He knows when you've been good or bad, so be good, for goodness' sake!"  :)

 

[Doomkid]

I'm a fan of year-long bans for people who just act a fool or say stupid shit. People can learn. Permabans are reserved for ddosers, hackers, cheaters and excessive spammers on any services I run.

 

I'm very glad to see 0 people have voted for "let pieces of shit stay around because they make cool stuff" though.

 

EDIT: Of the people specifically mentioned, I have no beef with Technician and I like dn, but Huy Pham and Sigvatr definitely deserved their bans. Sigvatr was a piece of shit:

Last I heard [Sigvatr] was trying to worm his way into Mechadon's high profile project, like it would never succeed without him. There was also some kind of bullshit that he tried to take credit for every major Doom release in the last decade, like they were all inspired by him. I don't think he's ever released a single map, so that's quite a feat. Stupid if he's trolling, utter bullshit if he really believes it. I don't think he'd be much value here.

Edited December 9, 2017 by Doomkid

[Red]

As someone who is still kind of an outsider to the community at large I gotta say this was quite the thread.

 

[rodster]

Permabans? I think stuff like spambots should get instant permabans for sure, thankfully I have never seen spambots here :) (or they just didn't survive long enough for me to take notice).

 

From my point of view, permabans are inevitable at some point. Usually a sincere apology is enough to get rid of a ban.

Edited December 9, 2017 by rodster

[snapshot]

> Yes, except when the user is actively contributing great projects.

 

Beautiful excuse.

 

[Da Werecat]

I knew there were some fun stories to share. Why were the others kicked out?

[40oz]

18 hours ago, Decay said:

Controversial figure profile: capodecima

...

Ban evasion

 

 

I understand the logic of enforcing this loophole that banned members take, but too often I see people conflate the offense of ban evasion to something equal or greater than what one does to get banned in the first place, which is retarded.

 

If anyone knows what it's like to have your posting privileges taken away, they're 100% familiar with the immediate defensive gut reaction of wanting to have a dispute with the person who did it. It's a very normal and humane feeling to want to act on that.

[Decay]

I dunno man, I've been banned several times from zandronum, misc. servers, and irc channels, (for a combined total of 3 years) and I never once ban evaded or considered ban evading. Most ban evasions are done to intentionally continue pissing people off, "ban evasion" as an offense indicates no remorse and continued rule breaking. It's not like they are ban evading to hold a civilized discussion over tea and cookies to get to the root cause why they were banned. Ban evasions are also usually under the category of temporary bans (months/year) and not being able to live that sentence.

 

<Metal> You have at least 2 years until you're unbanned.

<capo> for 2 years i will probably dead

[40oz]

I've never considered you to be a very humane type of person.

 

EDIT: Sorry, I used the word humane, which is pretty extreme. But in my experience reading your posts and having dialogues with you, I very rarely see you speaking with any sort of empathy towards the person you're talking to unless they start with a position of understanding your position first,

Edited December 9, 2017 by 40oz

[Nine Inch Heels]

OK... Gonna grab some popcorn right now...

 

Also what does Decay's POV have to do with being "humane" or not? Maybe some people actually have enough decency and maturity to accept the slap on the wrist that they deserved. Or maybe they're actually reasonable enough to know that going right for the mod who banned them the moment they notice also isn't the best of ideas, because usually letting things cool down a little is the better course of action if there's a severe conflict of interest.

[killer2]

    I've never actually been banned on a forum, but I could see people ban evading for non-insiduous reasons. It could be to share one of their projects (like Sigvatr's case) or maybe just to share his POV with the community and try to explain themselves or their case. It could also be their only direct way to talk to the moderators if they've done something that prompted them to ignore them forever (IDK if this ever happened, but it could). I'm not really fond of absolute justice, and I think everything should be judged on a case-by-case basis, as it provides more accurate results. This is why injustice happens in the real world too, rules that are too strict and never bend.

    Please try to keep the discussion civil and avoid derailing the thread over pointless things (such as whether Decay is humane or not. As for you Decay, try to use some less extreme examples than the worst of the worst, that seems like cherry-picking to make the opposing party look bad).

[Phade102]

If someone has done something to warrant a perma ban, I say good riddance. I dont care what they made. If someone such as Jimmy, who made adventures of square, and other great wads did something to warrant a permaban? it'd be disappointing, but not undeserved.

[killer2]

    The problem with that line of thinking is...who is to say objectively whether something is deserved or not? The rules? I don't think applying a rigid system like rules works for something as complex and varied as human psychology. Besides, what if somebody deserves (whatever that means) his permaban status for let's say 5 years (maybe they're 12 years old and really immature for instance), but then ends up not deserving it anymore? Is it right for them to be banned forever? Is it right to throw people under the bus and label them as problems that will never change? I think that's more than a bit short-sighted.

[MrDeAD1313]

Is being 'losered' still a thing? I actually forgot about that until now. Wasn't sure if that went away with post hell and/or if they were related in any way

[Memfis]

I don't know how to determine whether something is deserved, but I know it's much harder when people get silently banned with no explanation for others to see...

[Da Werecat]

I'd understand the passion if we were talking about a legal system in some country, but this is an internet forum, privately owned. It's kinda like being a guest somewhere. If you take a dump on the carpet, you should probably expect to be disliked for some time, and you don't get to demand anything.

 

Eternal patience sounds nice in theory, but it's not free. When you give someone another chance, you risk them taking a dump again, this time on another guest's foot. At some point you should probably start caring about everyone else.

[⇛Marnetmar⇛]

You're missing the point entirely if you think guys like Darknation shouldn't have been banned purely on the basis of them making interesting points.

These people aren't banned because their views go against the norm, they're banned because once someone challenges their views they refuse to participate and instead resort to deflection and acting like a general pain in the ass. I don't care if someone has a shrine to Hitler in their bedroom and thinks throwing orphans into a meatgrinder is a great past-time, what's important is if they refuse to engage in any kind of useful discussion once their ideas fall apart under scrutiny. 

 

Acting in bad faith has no place in any community.

[june gloom]

14 hours ago, killer2 said:

    Not necessarely. If their behaviour was made with a sound mind, with the sole intent and purpose to make everyone involved feel like shit, then absolutely. If, however, it comes from somebody with deeply rooted psychological issues, then still yes, but not indefinitely. If this person were to contact me some time later and tell me they've undergone therapy or just got better at dealing with their emotions and mental state, I would be inclined to give them a second chance.

 

    I will admit however that I am biased in this. People in real life always tended to make me frustrated and angry, and I couldn't retaliate as there would be consequences. Therefore, when it would become unbearable I would search for someone online and just make their life miserable by any means I could. It made me feel good, like a release of all the bad thoughts and energy I had. But then I would "wake up" and see what I've done, and in the end if that person was still there the only thing I could say would be "I'm sorry" in every way I could, because ultimately, they did nothing wrong...and I didn't mean to say those things to them. It was like being in a trance, I would be aware of what I'm doing but not able to stop myself. 

    I don't do this anymore, and I know some people who do this don't actually mean to do it, it's more of an emotional and visceral reaction. I know it can get better and that it can be overcome, as I did it myself.

 

    I'm not sure if this is the kind of response you were looking for...I tried remaking this post several times as I had to deal with repressed memories, and it's gonna be rambly as hell...but here it is.

Doomworld really needs a laugh react.

 

I'm sorry dude, but as someone who has struggled with anger issues and other shit for close to 25 years there's no excuse for the shit I've done. I've lost friends, ruined my reputation once or twice, and I've probably shut some professional and personal opportunities away from myself too. I can only take responsibility for my own actions; anything short of that is cowardice and self-delusion. It doesn't matter whether I "meant" to or not -- it only matters that I did it, and that I made life shittier for people around me. I don't blame people for walking away. Nobody should feel obliged to wait around for someone else's self-improvement.

[Nine Inch Heels]

If someone gets temp-banned from commenting (or losered as was the case some time ago around here) repeatedly, there have been enough warning shots. If people don't take those seriously enough to understand what is acceptable and what isn't, it really is their fault if they get themselves permanently banned at some point in time, doubly so if they are guest in an environment in which perma-bans are a possibility to begin with.

 

Perma-bans are a last resort for when everything else has failed repeatedly already, and that's all there is to it. The way I see it, this is quite a lenient forum compared to other places I have seen so far which have similar "visits per day".

 

Aside of all that, it really is nobody's business why somebody gets banned, except for the person in question and the admins making the calls. It's also not like word doesn't get around eventually, so there's that too.

If what you want is to discuss if there should be some way for people to "redeem" themselves after a certain period of time has passed since they got perma banned, then that's another topic to which there are several pros and cons in general.

[Doomkid]

1 hour ago, Marnetstapler said:

These people aren't banned because their views go against the norm, they're banned because once someone challenges their views they refuse to participate and instead resort to deflection and acting like a general pain in the ass.

 

I can think of several users that aptly describes who have not been banned and personally that's not how I remember dn being banned anyway. He was banned for being offensive for the sake of being offensive repeatedly which is totally different than not being able to defend your ideas. It's not exactly becoming behavior but let's not revise history here.

 

Granted, I don't think an inability to defend your position should be an inherently bannble offense as long as you aren't attacking other users or something. Even in the case of the numerous users who switch to vitriol when their ideas are challenged, I wouldn't want to see them banned.

 

Maybe I'm just not enough of a hard ass when it comes to punishments but targeted malice is not synonymous with being a bit dumb and having some crazy ideas.

 

Oh and this is just me but I'd totally have a problem with someone who has a shrine to Hitler and chucks babies in a meat grinder. Call me crazy but that comes off as a touch worse than being a meanie head on the innernets.

[killer2]

1 minute ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

 

 

    Aside of all that, it really is nobody's business why somebody gets banned, except for the person in question and the admins making the calls. It's also not like word doesn't get around eventually, so there's that too.

 

 

 

    I feel like that puts too much power in the hands of the moderators though. If your permaban is righteous, why not make the reasons public for everyone to see? After all permabanning someone doesn't only affect the moderators, but everyone that is active on the forums or is actively interested in certain projects which may get canned as a result

 

2 minutes ago, Nine Inch Heels said:

    If what you want is to discuss if there should be some way for people to "redeem" themselves after a certain period of time has passed since they got perma banned, then that's another topic to which there are several pros and cons in general.

    That's what I am saying, yes. Maybe the wording of the topic doesn't imply that, but having the possibility for someone to redeem himself goes directly against the idea of a perma-ban (which is supposed to be permanent, without any way of redemption...or at least that's what the name "perma-ban" implies to me). That's what I wrote in the OP too, having a maximum amout of time on bans would remove the permanency of the bans while still keeping the forums almost as clean as before (or that's how I see it, anyways).

 

45 minutes ago, dethtoll said:

Doomworld really needs a laugh react.

 

I'm sorry dude, but as someone who has struggled with anger issues and other shit for close to 25 years there's no excuse for the shit I've done. I've lost friends, ruined my reputation once or twice, and I've probably shut some professional and personal opportunities away from myself too. I can only take responsibility for my own actions; anything short of that is cowardice and self-delusion. It doesn't matter whether I "meant" to or not -- it only matters that I did it, and that I made life shittier for people around me. I don't blame people for walking away. Nobody should feel obliged to wait around for someone else's self-improvement.

    Obviously, losing important things is a big step towards realizing your attitude is a problem and needs to change, and I'm not denying that. However, once you did change your attitude, do the important things still being lost serve any purpose? I don't think so. I don't think if those people decided to give you a chance every now and then that would make either your life or theirs worse. The choice of whether they do that or not is 100% theirs, but it's still a choice, and I think abandoning people completely is always wrong. 

    It has been proven that working together with problematic people and being ready to forget them rather than locking them out has the best possible results in keeping a community clean and crime-free. I think this video makes a great case. I know it might not be exactly the same situation but I think it's similar enough.