Banned posters

[daniel]

If a poster is banned, how can you tell or prevent the same person from registering as a different poster?

[KrustyKidd]

IP address. Shows up to the admin beside the name. If you are cool then he wont do a compare check. Also, can ban the IP itself if he wants.

[Greg]

As Krusty said, I can view a posters IP address, which allow me to compare and resolve (gives me the ISP and often the location) multiple posters IP's. I can also ban IP addresses from using the site, but this can cause problems, as not everyone has a static IP address. In some cases if you are using a dialup account, a different IP address is assigned to you each time you dial in.

We also require each new posting account to have a unique (and functioning) email address. Which again, isn't foolproof, as someone can simply go and signup for multiple different free email addresses (hotmail, yahoo, etc). But in the end, these steps along with my monitoring make it rather difficult for banned individuals from returning.

It will happen from time to time, but I'll do my best to minimize the damage.

Cheers,

Greg

Admin

[August1991]

Greg,

You banned "Common Sense".

Why?

Is the ban permanent? Is it temporary?

Is the cause of the ban public knowledge? Are its conditions public knowledge?

Greg, are you a transparent bureaucracy?

So many questions, so little time.

[Greg]

Why?

I suspended Common Sense because he chose to ignore my repeated warnings on posting ignorant slurs.

Is the ban permanent? Is it temporary?

The ban, as I said in the thread and typical for this type of behaviour, is for one month. If s/he decides to continue to ignore my warnings after the suspension, s/he will be banned for life.

Is the cause of the ban public knowledge? Are its conditions public knowledge?

Its public knowledge if you followed the thread, otherwise, no.

Greg, are you a transparent bureaucracy?

It's neither a bureaucracy or a democracy. Disciplinary actions like this one are made in an attempt to minimize the destructive behaviour some posters bring to this forum. As I mention in the forums rules, I try to use this power judiciously and fairly, but my decisions are final.

Greg

[I miss Reagan]

You do a good job Greg but IMO a ban for using the word "fiberal" was a little harsh. The statement is an attack on idiology not on any one person.

[Cartman]

CS said:

So dumb dumb why do you have difficulty with the facts.  I know you can't deal with the truth and as for dignity that is something is totally lacking by the Fiberals

Greg said:

As I've said in the past, it is unacceptable to use these types of words in this forum.

Then CS said:

before you politically correct bunch start your crap about them remember they have not been in power so they have done nothing wrong whereas the Fiberals have BIG TIME !!

Then Greg said:

What did I just say about using words like Fiberal?  See you in a month Common Sense.

Then August said:

Greg,  You banned "Common Sense".  Why?

I will take a wild guess here August. Because he continued to make improper statements after being warned not to do so? Or maybe Greg just had a bad cold that day?

August said:

Is the ban permanent? Is it temporary?

Hmmm...Greg just said "see you in a month" so I'm thinkiiiinnnng a month?

August, every now and then you generate posts that make me, and others I am sure, sit down and think. Why detract from these strong posts with crap like this?! Why the attitude? Have you ever thought that Greg might be expected to moderate this forum in a professional fashion? IMR makes a far stronger case.

[August1991]

Greg, would you please answer here the issue with MS?

MS has made many, many posts to this forum. IMHO, some of his posts are sensible, some less so. But that is neither here nor there.

I have never found MS to be disruptive (if that's possible on an Internet forum). To my knowledge, he has never used that odious term "Fiberal".

I wondered why I hadn't seen posts from MS and I'm disheartened to learn that he was in some way "censored". What the devil for?

I never replied to Cartman's query above but it seems relevant now:

August, every now and then you generate posts that make me, and others I am sure, sit down and think. Why detract from these strong posts with crap like this?! Why the attitude? Have you ever thought that Greg might be expected to moderate this forum in a professional fashion? IMR makes a far stronger case.

I'll graciously accept the compliment and then move on to the question.

It seems to me that someone should be banned from any "club" if she/he interferes with other people engaged in conversation.

In a closed room with many people, I can understand why a judge might have someone arrested for contempt. Loud, screaming people make conversation impossible. One person threatening another or speaking out of turn makes it impossible for others to discuss.

On the Internet, none of these problems arise.

I would consider banning posters who post long, incoherent posts with bad spelling and grammar. These posts make it difficult for me to discuss with other posters.

I have seen on other forums threads dissolve to "Jerk" "Idiot" "Big Jerk" "Big Idiot" and so on. I find this irritating because I have to wade through nonsense to find an intelligent post. Posters who engage in this should be warned.

In truth though, we don't have these kinds of problems on this forum.

What harm can any poster possibly inflict on any participant here? Now, compare that with the potential benefit of a new idea.

Greg, I think you should give the widest possible berth to posters. It's only an Internet forum. We have no power over anyone. Posters are free to ignore any comment here.

[Slavik44]

yeah hmm....

FUCK YOU!

gee if you prefer that over typo's you should have told me sooner.

[Cartman]

I'll graciously accept the compliment and then move on to the question.

Well, it was a compliment for the most part.

I agree with August on this issue. I do not like it at all when people use profanity, rhetoric etc., but most of us have done it at some point. Considering the number of posts made by MS, it is logical that s/he would have more of these kinds of posts in absolute numbers. Most of MS's posts are honest and designed to add to the discussion and not simply disrupt it. Many posters are content to simply refute the ideas put forth by others rather than contribute with their own. I do not think that we can say the same for MS. I would truly hope that some kind of a compromise could be made about this matter.

Slavik, by quoting the profanity you are making the same original mistake you complain about.

[Slavik44]

I'll graciously accept the compliment and then move on to the question.

Well, it was a compliment for the most part.

I agree with August on this issue. I do not like it at all when people use profanity, rhetoric etc., but most of us have done it at some point. Considering the number of posts made by MS, it is logical that s/he would have more of these kinds of posts in absolute numbers. Most of MS's posts are honest and designed to add to the discussion and not simply disrupt it. Many posters are content to simply refute the ideas put forth by others rather than contribute with their own. I do not think that we can say the same for MS. I would truly hope that some kind of a compromise could be made about this matter.

Slavik, by quoting the profanity you are making the same original mistake you complain about.

No intnet, I don't mean it and hope people realise that. However I would also assert that there is a difference between profanity in a post and profanity directed towards a person, I have seen profanity in posts, and I am sure I am guilty of such, but the profanity is not directed at someone, and if you want to have an intellegint conversation saying FU, distracts greatly from such intellegince, it becomes an insult and distracts from the topic at hand.

[Greg]

To answer everyone's question, MS has not been banned. His posts have been placed into a moderation queue and every morning - when I get around to it - I either approve or delete his postings. The reason for this action is simple - MS, after repeated warnings to curtail both the profanities and the trolling, choose to ignore the basic rules and guidelines of this forum. MS was unwilling to censor himself, so now I'm saddled with the responsibility.

MS brought this upon himself - I gave him far more leeway that I should have and all he has done between his earlier suspension and now was increase his disrespectful and disruptive behaviour.

If he is able to curtail the poor behaviour, I'll release him from the moderation queue, otherwise he will be banned permanently.

Greg

Admin

[August1991]

The reason for this action is simple - MS, after repeated warnings to curtail both the profanities and the trolling, choose to ignore the basic rules and guidelines of this forum.

I have not known MS to use profanity except on very rare occasions when I suspect s/he felt provoked.

Accusing MS of being a troll is absurd. I have never known MS to be duplicitous.

An internet troll is a person who sends duplicitous messages to get angry responses, or a message sent by such a person.

Wikipedia - Internet Troll

If he is able to curtail the poor behaviour, I'll release him from the moderation queue, otherwise he will be banned permanently.

Greg, I vote strongly in favour of letting MS post without hindrance. BTW, it will mean less work for you. And maybe this forum self-regulates itself more than you imagine.

----

Note to Slavik:

gee if you prefer that over typo's you should have told me sooner.

I object much less to your F**K YOU than your needless quote of my longish post.

So in fact, I thought your post made a good point.

[Hugo]

It is a fact that these forums are a private enterprise and Greg can run them however he sees fit. However, since you're going to criticize him I'll weigh in.

I have not known MS to use profanity except on very rare occasions when I suspect s/he felt provoked.

MS has quite often sworn at people and used very derogatory terms about specific posters on this forum. Quite often he/she will resort to foul language and bigoted terms ("whitey" being a recent example).

Accusing MS of being a troll is absurd. I have never known MS to be duplicitous.

MS will often start a thread and then not post again, or refuse to be engaged in debate. I have tried to debate his/her points on several occasions and been ignored. If MS wants to do that I would suggest he/she start a weblog, because a forum is the wrong place to do this.

Greg, I vote strongly in favour of letting MS post without hindrance. BTW, it will mean less work for you.

Actually, since MS is so annoying and disruptive it would be less work for Greg if he banned MS altogether. I return to these forums because there is a high quality of writing, no flame wars and intelligent debate. MS endangers all of this.

I'm glad that MS is gone. I post here to have intelligent debates, not to listen to the childish ranting of half-wits. This forum is not Jerry Springer's show.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear August1991,

I have not known MS to use profanity except on very rare occasions when I suspect s/he felt provoked.

Occasional use, even 'when provoked' is still no excuse when:

1. profanity is used in a non-contextual manner, as a direct insult at another poster, and

2. when repeatedly warned and previously suspended for the exact same actions.

Accusing MS of being a troll is absurd. I have never known MS to be duplicitous.

I am inclined to agree, but, given the absurdity of some of maplesyrup's posts, and the complete lack of ability(or will) to counter various viable arguments against, was maplesyrup being disingenuous, or just pig-headed?

Greg, I vote strongly in favour of letting MS post without hindrance. BTW, it will mean less work for you. And maybe this forum self-regulates itself more than you imagine.

I have seen what unregulated and moderated forums can be like. I vote strongly that Greg continue to moderate in the spirit of the forum and in the fashion he has done.

Maplesyrup may be a prolific catalyst to various debates on this forum, but he/she has been given ample warnings and leeway, and has still chosen to ignore the warnings from the moderator to debate/post in a reasonable fashion.

I don't think Greg asks too much.

[I miss Reagan]

There it is, great evidence that no body likes the police. Or at least that the enforcers of the rules get stuck in the middle of the controvercy (how bout some sympathy for the good ol' USA).

MS does appear to troll. Many of his topics and posts appear to be attempting to offend or bait others into an emotional response. An example would be the topic "Should we ban the Catholic Church, scumbags of the earth". That's pretty incendiary in my books. That being said Greg walks a fine line. He has to balance it between becoming a boring political blog and degenerating into a tit for tat ad hominem circus. This is a political web site and politics incite strong feelings so I think there should be some room for rhetoric and emotion. If there wasn't intended to be a some jabing why provide the emotcons :angry: etc. The tough part is figuring out where to draw the line.

[Slavik44]

sorry august it is just instinct to quote people.

[Tawasakm]

I would like to add my emphatic view that there is absolutely nothing wrong with the way this site is being moderated. Given the clear rules and the use of warnings I don't see there is any room for complaint if somebody does get banned (or related measures). The rules and the moderation are a big part of the reason for the high quality of discussion here (cumbersome sentence there wasn't it?).

Now I'm going to go watch Cops...

[Greg]

Consider this issue dead.

Due to a number of incidents between my last post and today, MS has now been banned.

Greg

Admin

[kimmy]

Although I understand (and support ) the reasons Maple Syrup has been banned, I must confess I'll miss the little guy. I liked the cut of his gibberish. His messages often gave me great enjoyment, and I frequently laughed out loud while reading his hysterical ranting. When I read his ...works... I had this mental image of someone with a severe facial tic, gripping his keyboard with white-knuckled intensity and his heart teetering dangerously towards tachycardial paroxysm as he raged over some real or imagined slight of the Progressive Society of the Future. Or of a dewy-eyed romantic, clutching his hands to his chest as he waxed poetic over Jack Layton's latest triumph. But of course, what I myself and I'm sure many others will remember most about Maple Syrup is his inability to articulate his own beliefs or challenge others' beliefs with anything more than a Sesame Street level of critical thinking ability. Watching Syrup attempt to engage in discussion always brought to mind Ernie and Bert trying to explain the difference between "near... and far." And perhaps if Syrup weren't so manic I'd have wondered if he were made out of felt in real life. But I tend to think of Syrup not as a Muppet, but as the internet equivalent of the "Church of the Fire of God" street preachers that I used to see at the entrance to downtown Ottawa's Rideau Center shopping mall on Saturday afternoons. Wild, crazy, unpredictable, funny, and just a little scary. Reading Maple Syrup's messages was like spending a moment with a manic zealot street-preacher, without having to wipe spittle and froth off your jacket afterwards.

Godspeed, little buddy. I have nothing but fond memories.

-kimmy

[I miss Reagan]

A fitting eulogy. But what scared the #$@# out of me was that at least 17% of this country would agree with his dilusional rantings.

[Guest eureka]

I do not even recall the profanities of Maple Syrup: but then, I rarely notice them in any post. I read posts only for relevant content and pass over others.

I am astonished at some of the comments about Maple Syrup. If ever I read postings by someone with his heart in the right place, it was his work. Agree with MS or not, he was almost always on the high road. He initiated many worth while discussions and that he was not quite able to fully engage in the ensuing debates is of no importance. Many posters fall into that category. We are all out of our depth at times: isn't that why we are here?

Society needs many more like him. And, IMR, you can add to your 17% the 20% or so of the poor and disenfranchised who were the subject of most of MS's topics.

Kimmy, are you a professional writer of eulogies (or obituaries)? That was masterly.

[August1991]

I agree with eureka.

If I look through this thread, the worst I can find is that MS used the term "whitey" and used the term "scumbag" in reference to the Catholic church. It was noted that MS started threads but often didn't follow up debate.

And for this, MS is banned?

Admittedly, Greg apparently warned MS on several occasions about a possible ban. (Warnings about what?)

I repeat again: this is only an Internet forum. It is impossible to cause real harm to anyone here. It is difficult to disrupt discussions. In practical terms, this forum is so small that we self-regulate. Occasionally, a true whacko shows up and then Greg gets rid of the poster (if the poster hasn't already left).

New ideas often come from diverse sources. It is one reason I participate in this forum.

I disagree with Greg's decision to ban MS. I am surprised that it is a permanent ban.

IMV, this ban is not right.

[Cartman]

New ideas often come from diverse sources. It is one reason I participate in this forum.

Well put August. I agree entirely.

[RB]

I don't sometimes agree with the banning - rules are guidelines that we follow. There is something also called discretion. I mean 20% of the top 10 posters are banned and if I followed the bans correctly these were the all time #1 posters in terms of number of posts at the time of the bans. A fair measurement would be the more you post the likelier it is to get banned especially if you make it to the top 10.

I don’t believe Maplesyrup was quite as dynamic as Read who justified his position taken on the various political realms. But also, Maplesyrup provided real thought provoking topics for discussion.

I had only once queried a banning and that was the banning of Mr Craig Read who did not conceal his political phew. Goodness, he even posted his identity. Read provided us with engaging discussions, posit his strong opinion and responded intelligently to the debates. Hardly, the playground you see in the House of Commons.

Now only recently, I happened upon this website www.craigread.com that reinforced my believe that Read was a very serious Mapleleafweb poster and very serious about his political views, enough so, to publish a new book America and Europe: Conflict and Power

Maplesyrup, I think might also be such a person who is interested in politics to make a difference.

I respect the final decisions made but also glad that we are given the opportunity of space to post our disagreement.

Below find the letter written to Greg February 04 that did not really matter.

Author Private Message

RB

Group: Members

Posts: 372

Joined: 19-March 03

Greg,

Firstly, I wanted to commend you on the excellent job you do at Maple Leaf Forum.

Politics have never particularly interest me prior so I have less disregard for any sort of pieties of the same.

That is until I started to take interest in the information you provide and information the members share particularly Mr Read's and others. I continue to visit because of the uniqueness of presentation, pride and quality the membership project. It demands you be modish at all times in the write-ups.

I admit I am just a "small fry" in the scope of things, but confess I am hardly about "talk" and mostly "do". The forum presents itself as a real motivator for me to accomplish my occasional runnings with the folks down at city hall when I want things accomplished.

Even though I made Maple Leaf Web my homepage, and would like to contribute much, I am mostly busy writing to city hall folks when I am not busy with my school stuff and work of course.

So far here is what happen in my local area since I started to visit your forum:

- tennis lights for the tennis courts

- compromise - fence to block and direct traffic flow on new plaza development

- no parking tickets to be issued in my street until it is officially a street

- new home for displaced birds (these were making noises every bloody Saturday morning when I wish to sleep in )

Anyway, so you can understand when I come around nowadays and find one of my motivators disappeared and banned. Because I am unaware of Mr Read's ban from the forum until just now, I was looking at his profile can I ask why? and is there a likelihood that a person ban can be reinstated? can the membership have a % role in deciding who gets banned? sort of a voting system based on perhaps length of time and number of contributions

I have a feeling even though Read is unaware of an impact on others and confusion he creates that he is very sincere in his politics, his believes and likes to contribute in your forum however radical

Benjamin Disraeli says "Finality is not the language of politics." so I am writing in hope that this particular ban is not finality and is revisited for those of us who can speak up

Thanks

(Signature edited)