Topic: [Interest Check] - User Rank 'Banned' (Read 6059 times)

Nothing. In fact, I did maintain a summary of the perma-bans.
I think I have the list from September 2015 to around Feb 2016.
Then I got tired of doing it. 

As I've already mentioned, it doesn't work in several scenarios and isn't as efficient as a user rank would be. Unless there is a tool, that is easily available for all of the reporters, which keeps track and helps with analyzing the log, then this just isn't enough.


Who are these people that you're talking about? I do not like to speculate regarding their intentions. I'll let someone else do this.

Doesn't the aforementioned log do just that already?


I'm actually curious what is driving all these people, I mean supporters of this idea (not the people who search for body doubles, though they seem to be mostly the same individuals). Are they just striving for more blood spilt? If they are sincere and do really want to help forum get rid of shitty posters and the garbage they post (I'm all in, just in case), why don't they just stick to using this log? If it is not very handy for this aim, a utility can be designed for analyzing it specifically for this purpose. People have been writing all kinds of scripts for obtaining various statistics about the forum, so there shouldn't be any difficulty in developing a specialized tool for these headhunters, right?

What are their real motives?

The idea is to save time and avoid uncertainty. I could say that a fair % of reports that I get via PM have already been handled (i.e. banned). Not only does this waste my own time, but also the time of the person that wrote up the report (unless they are the first one to catch the violator). I'm certain that this happens to other moderators as well.

It applies for different kinds of violations. There are plenty of people who are contributing (specifically reporting) to the forum and in favor of this. I don't see why we should listen to the non contributors (does this include you?), since it doesn't really affect them. It would be easier to find ban evading alts for the people looking into that, but that's another story.

Nothing. This is a question for botany, as I don't have a stance on the log.

I'm curious when peeps will finally stop contriving arguments for justifying the introduction of the Banned rank? Is there really anyone interested if some user got a permaban a month ago? What would be the purpose of that if that user is no longer able to post thanks to the ban anyway? The main argument in favor of adding this ugly rank seems to help catch copy-pasters, but if an alleged scofflaw hasn't been posting for a week or longer, aren't we already there?

In respect to making longer logs, what prevents the agents of justice and masters of destinies from just copying this log daily?

Correct. But making the full modlog would bring out other useful information too.
Like the number of posts of a user which have been deleted..

I guess increasing the length of the log is another option. However, that would not work for older bans (unless it was made permanently viewable) and it would be inefficient in comparison to just having the user have the rank.

The last 7 days' activity can be found there.
I had raised a question of whether the full (or a slightly longer) log can be made available.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/modlog-1209243
If this is done, it would list out all the permabans.....

Modlog only goes back a few days (or maybe weeks).

I heard about that but didn't pay attention to this fact at that moment. Basically, it means that all arguments about local agents Bonds looking for copy-pasters and pretending that they can't know if a user has been banned already are unfounded, at least as far I can see. Since it doesn't make sense to grant the Banned rank to a member who is in a temporary ban, this reason (i.e. being unable to determine if a member has a permaban) is not very convincing...

If I'm not missing something, of course

There is always a nagging doubt about whether the signature has been removed due to a ban, or whether the user has removed the signatures.
In case of permabans, which are due to your copy-paste report, the best way is to check the modlog. Perma-bans are reported there.

Correct. However, keep in mind that it still does not help if:
1) Member in question had no signature or relevant information in the first place.
2) You encounter the member in question after they've been banned. You can't know whether they had been wearing a signature prior unless you do some digging or report it to a moderator (hence this being time wasteful).

I see. I did a quick check on some and they were indeed missing their signatures. Thanks, DarkStar!

Edit: It works on the higher ranks but not on Member, lower, those who have yet to join a campaign, or those still being ranked up/farmed. Still, it's a great start. Again, thank you for the info.

Copy and pasting has always been a permaban IIRC, and permabanned accounts' signatures are removed.

I would like to ask when this would be implemented?

I hope it's done soon as it would really be a big help.

I report users who copy/paste in the forum, but I always end up somewhat confused and worried because I have no way to see for myself if my report was seen or acted upon by the mods.  
There's always the chance that it might have been missed due to them being swamped at the time.

So, I always check the account/s I've reported to see and check if there was any indication that they were banned.
There was nothing I could see, and so in the end, just to make sure, I always send a PM to Lauda to report it directly.
It's the only way I could be at ease since they always make sure to send me a message to confirm that the appropriate action has been taken.

And so, Please implement this 'banned' title as soon as you can. It would be a great help for us who try to contribute to the forum since it would eliminate the need for the 'wait and see', and all that 'back and forth'.

(I sometimes hesitate to send a report because what if 'It's already been reported' or 'It's already been acted upon'?
I do not wish to waste other's time but there is just no way for me to check for myself.)

---

If you have suggestions, please say so, but I do not wish to engage in debate/nitpicking just for the sake of.

As you may have noticed, I'm not a native speaker and have trouble expressing myself, so apologies for any error.
Thank You.

Rome was not built in a day


Yes, such matters should not be discussed publicly. When you hire somebody for a job, you don't discuss them with other employees. And no, I don't mind if Lauda wants to be a new global moderator. In fact, it is not bad overall that someone might want to become a moderator. If you ask me, I don't want, but then again, it is just me (I'm more inclined to anarchy and personal responsibility). In fact, I'm not even against Lauda as a new global moderator (or someone else, for that matter). I rather question the methods chosen to get there...

You may deem that as a reply to your assumption of some personal vendetta against her (just in case, there's none)


It is not a question of belief. It is a fact that everyone is selfish and acts in his own best interests as he understands them (and in someone else's, to the degree he doesn't)

Not all things, of course. But some of them should not be really discussed in public for the reasons that I have explained in the Elections Discussion thread. In short, because such discussions could potentially affect the objectivity and impartiality of the decisions to be taken on these issues by the decision makers (forum administration). On a more global level, it essentially boils down to claiming that democracy (i.e. the right of majority), which you implicitly refer to here, doesn't work if applied for real...

In other words, majority might not be always right, and that could be devastatingly detrimental


So far I see a rather poorly concealed strife for power

No, that is not the case. All this proposal does is change the rank of permanently banned users to 'Banned'.

Correct, global moderators and admins.

I've suggested this proposal to theymos after it has been mentioned somewhere else, and they told me to create a thread. The elections were actually not my idea, I was just one of the people that helped create it.

Ultimately theymos decides (or does not decide) based on the factors that they seem most important, but the election is off-topic here.

---

This is one of the rare times that I hear complaints about doing things transparently (regarding the 'Banned' rank in particular).

Global Mod just gives the mod responsibility over a larger area of the forum. It doesn't give them any extra power besides deleting/moving posts and respect. The ones with real power are the admins.

So you're opposing the fact that Lauda wants a new global mod to be the choice of the community? You'd rather it just go on silently and behind the scenes, like with Cyrus?

It seems like you have some sort of personal vendetta towards Lauda, so I'll just stop here.

---

So let me get this straight. You believe that Lauda is just selfish and wants the power to themself?

And your proof is that she is all of a sudden making a bunch of new topics related to mod spots?

This thread has nothing to do with that, in any case. This is about making it visible to whether a user is banned or not. What do you have against that, huh? I don't see a reason, besides someone's privacy. However, if they're banned, they shouldn't care anymore.

Indeed, it doesn't. But as I said in one of my earlier posts in this thread, it justifies giving new privileges and rights, and as it eventually turned out, it came down to adding a new global moderator. As I got it, only global moderators can give out permanent bans, right? At first this "interest check" which shows that people are eager to see more blood spilt, and then the "elections" which arrive just in time to ride the wave of rage and wrath toward poor fellas trying to earn a few pennies (this shouldn't be misconstrued as if I were justifying shit posting). I'm curious if I'm the only one who sees these events as closely connected...

Or am I the only one who has enough courage to speak it out loud?