[Interest Check] - User Rank 'Banned' - page 3.

Gunthar

hero member

Activity: 1498

Merit: 614

Liable for what i say, not for what you understand

Quote from: Lauda on November 11, 2016, 06:15:33 PM

Quote from: redsn0w on November 11, 2016, 02:42:14 PM

Thanks for the reply Lauda, so at the end it's only to avoid to lose precious time every time someone ask if an account is banned or not ... isn't it? Other reasons (from your point of view?).

That's pretty much it. It should save time for pretty much any party involved in addition to removing redundancy and inconsistency. This helps people that are hunting account farmers, spammers or just any other kind of rule-breaking users. I could see potential harm in doing this with temporarily banned accounts, but it seems pretty okay to do it with permanently banned ones IMO.

Personally i dont see any issue with temp bans being tagged, i wish we had such a thing in the actual "trust" indicators indeed...you get temp banned for any reason...it stays on your curriculum...
but yeah i know i look a bit nazi sometimes...
~Gun

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: redsn0w on November 11, 2016, 02:42:14 PM

Thanks for the reply Lauda, so at the end it's only to avoid to lose precious time every time someone ask if an account is banned or not ... isn't it? Other reasons (from your point of view?).

That's pretty much it. It should save time for pretty much any party involved in addition to removing redundancy and inconsistency. This helps people that are hunting account farmers, spammers or just any other kind of rule-breaking users. I could see potential harm in doing this with temporarily banned accounts, but it seems pretty okay to do it with permanently banned ones IMO.

snipie

legendary

Activity: 3178

Merit: 1140

#SWGT CERTIK Audited

YES! please added this rank mods or add a tag!
i saw few days back someone having a tag under his activity counter called "Banned" for the first time here and it was a nice one
it will be less confusing for members to know the inactive account from the banned one

dogie

legendary

Activity: 1666

Merit: 1185

dogiecoin.com

Absolutely yes please. If someone is that bad that they have to be permabanned then the words that got them there should be disclaimered with that permabanned tag.

redsn0w

legendary

Activity: 1778

Merit: 1043

#Free market

Yeah in the beginning I was only curious but lately I've changed my mind and I don't personally care to know if someone is permabanned or not.

Quote from: Lauda on November 11, 2016, 02:16:56 PM

Just read through the thread again. A simple example, of what happens to me personally (but not very often, since I'm not a global moderator) are reports of users that are already permanently banned. This has happened a fair amount of times this year. This wastes time of both parties involved. It would also help people like:

Thanks for the reply Lauda, so at the end it's only to avoid to lose precious time every time someone ask if an account is banned or not ... isn't it? Other reasons (from your point of view?).

rizzlarolla

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1001

Quote from: redsn0w on November 11, 2016, 02:10:53 PM

Interesting, now I also think the ban (perma-ban) should not be visible to the other users... just for security. It's not useful, otherwise Lauda can you post (again) some arguments in favour of your 'request'? Thanks.

From that thread you started, (bearing in mind it was nearly 2 years ago)

Quote

I don't know , I've seen some users that were banned and their latest posts are more constructive than his.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/report-please-stop-this-user-891783

So how did you know that they were banned?
You asked, because you wanted to know, and were told by staff or admin, or you listened to rumour?

Should i ask every time i want to know if someone is banned?
Should the mods or admin tell me?

What if Joel_Jantsen wants to know if someone is banned, should he ask mods or admin?
Should the mods or admin tell him?

Looks to me like, as long as you know who is banned, when you need to know, that is what matters.

There will be many, many thousands of accounts marked as banned. (if all nuked zombie accounts are included as discussed)
banned accounts will be buried under new posts, only seen again by the diligent.

Have you read my posts on why it will be a useful tool?
Please explain how "security" is an issue here.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: redsn0w on November 11, 2016, 02:10:53 PM

Interesting, now I also think the ban (perma-ban) should not be visible to the other users... just for security. It's not useful, otherwise Lauda can you post (again) some arguments in favour of your 'request'? Thanks.

Again, this is not my *request* nor my proposal. I picked this up in another thread as it was mentioned by someone as I thought it's an idea that deserves a shot. After a brief discussion with theymos, they told me that I should maybe create a thread to check what the community thinks about this/whether there was demand for it.

Just read through the thread again. A simple example, of what happens to me personally (but not very often, since I'm not a global moderator) are reports of users that are already permanently banned. This has happened a fair amount of times this year. This wastes time of both parties involved. It would also help people like:

Quote from: Joel_Jantsen on November 11, 2016, 02:12:08 PM

Not sure how good the idea is but would certainly help me find if the accounts that I have personally reported to the admins (permaban requests) are banned yet or not.

Quote from: Joel_Jantsen on November 11, 2016, 02:12:08 PM

Additionally, I think there should be a another page like seclog which shows updates on daily banned accounts.

For both or permanent bans only?

Joel_Jantsen

legendary

Activity: 1988

Merit: 1317

Get your game girl

Not sure how good the idea is but would certainly help me find if the accounts that I have personally reported to the admins (permaban requests) are banned yet or not.
Additionally, I think there should be a another page like seclog which shows updates on daily banned accounts.

redsn0w

legendary

Activity: 1778

Merit: 1043

#Free market

Quote from: Quickseller on November 11, 2016, 01:38:11 PM

Quote from: Lutpin on November 11, 2016, 01:29:53 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on November 11, 2016, 01:25:16 PM

When you make it public that someone is banned, you make them vulnerable to imposters impersonating them in order to make it appear that the banned user is (attempting to) evading their ban.

What damage would that do to a user that is banned permanently already anyway?
You are be thinking about temporarily banned users, which would be banned longer/permanently if evading their ban?

Even if a user is banned "permanently" they can potentially have their ban lifted some time after their ban is instituted. It is not uncommon for these types of requests to be granted absent ban evasion attempts.

Also, just as it is not difficult to impersonate a user from an admin's point of view, it is not difficult to impersonate a user from the public's point of view. So someone could make it appear to admins that an account is evading a perm ban, and get said account banned, while making it appear that said account is an alt of a 3rd account to the public, and making this account show as being banned would only add credibility to this.

Interesting, now I also think the ban (perma-ban) should not be visible to the other users... just for security. It's not useful, otherwise Lauda can you post (again) some arguments in favour of your 'request'? Thanks.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: deisik on November 11, 2016, 01:59:21 PM

Since right now there is no Banned rank it seems that it is you who should first give proper arguments in favor of this feature (just in case, I've read the thread).

Plenty of people have voiced such arguments, I merely asked for opinions.

Quote from: deisik on November 11, 2016, 01:59:21 PM

On the other hand, withholding information about who banned a given user for what exactly doesn't look a very nice idea overall. Further, I cannot possibly agree that such questions serve no purpose as you claim.

It was always like that.

Quote from: deisik on November 11, 2016, 01:59:21 PM

Otherwise, how could we find out why this user has been stickied as banned?

For a good part of the user-base you can *guess* whether they are permanently banned if they have been in a signature campaign or had some profile information beforehand. However, this requires you to notice the user prior in addition to only being applicable to 2016 bans (which is when this change was introduced IIRC).

Quote from: deisik on November 11, 2016, 01:59:21 PM

Should I venture a guess that you expect the number of the "chosen" ones with the perma ban right to be expanded if your proposal gets accepted?

No. I do not expect that this will happen unless 1) A new global moderator is chosen. 2) Some of the old global moderators become very active again. 3) There is obvious need for this. This is actually not my proposal. It was suggested at least one time in the past, and brought up by someone else in another thread recently. I figured that it's an idea worth revisiting.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: Lauda on November 11, 2016, 01:27:37 PM

Quote from: deisik on November 11, 2016, 01:18:29 PM

This is not an idea, this is a gut feeling of sorts. I heavily suspect that this type of "clarity" may raise more questions than solve. If some user gets banned, and that pitiful fact is publicly announced (by bestowing the Banned rank on him), the majority of the forum members would like to know what this particular user has been banned for, who exactly banned him, and so on. If this info is provided (as it should be), some people may start asking themselves how come that some mods are giving out more bans than others...

And question if they aren't abusing the ban-hammer?

No, I don't see that happening (occasional question or two is normal for everything). Do not push for extremities. There is a very small group of people that are able to ban users, and that includes administrators and *some* global moderators. Information about bans will not likely be given out (unless a moderator comes forward stating that they've banned someone which is fine). Those questions really serve no purpose anyways.

I've yet to see proper concerns against this, besides: 1) Account farmer(s) fighting against it. 2) Concerns that it may not be really useful.

Since right now there is no Banned rank it seems that it is you who should first give proper arguments in favor of this feature (just in case, I've read the thread). On the other hand, withholding information about who banned a given user for what exactly doesn't look a very nice idea overall. Further, I cannot possibly agree that such questions serve no purpose as you claim. Otherwise, how could we find out why this user has been stickied as banned for? Especially if more users are expected to get permanently banned since this is what your idea obviously boils down to. As I got it, right now only few people have the privilege of permanently banning users, so it is not a problem so far...

Should I venture a guess and say that you expect the number of the "chosen" ones with the perma ban right to be expanded if your proposal gets accepted?

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2996

Merit: 2374

Quote from: Lutpin on November 11, 2016, 01:29:53 PM

Quote from: Quickseller on November 11, 2016, 01:25:16 PM

When you make it public that someone is banned, you make them vulnerable to imposters impersonating them in order to make it appear that the banned user is (attempting to) evading their ban.

What damage would that do to a user that is banned permanently already anyway?
You are be thinking about temporarily banned users, which would be banned longer/permanently if evading their ban?

Even if a user is banned "permanently" they can potentially have their ban lifted some time after their ban is instituted. It is not uncommon for these types of requests to be granted absent ban evasion attempts.

Also, just as it is not difficult to impersonate a user from an admin's point of view, it is not difficult to impersonate a user from the public's point of view. So someone could make it appear to admins that an account is evading a perm ban, and get said account banned, while making it appear that said account is an alt of a 3rd account to the public, and making this account show as being banned would only add credibility to this.

rizzlarolla

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1001

Quote from: deisik on November 11, 2016, 01:18:29 PM

Quote from: rizzlarolla on November 11, 2016, 12:57:29 PM

^^^ "If your point is punishment (which seems to be the case)," ^^^

where did you get that idea?
i'm pretty sure the purpose is not further punishment, it is for clarity.

This is not an idea, this is a gut feeling of sorts. I heavily suspect that this type of "clarity" may raise more questions than solve. If some user gets banned, and that pitiful fact is publicly announced (by bestowing the Banned rank on him), the majority of the forum members would like to know what this particular user has been banned for, who exactly banned him, and so on. If this info is provided (as it should be), some people may start asking themselves how come that some mods are giving out more bans than others...

And question if they aren't abusing the ban-hammer?

questions are good.
most members will never care.
you prefer that we know "some" banned users, as now, but not all.
most big names are probably already known, if banned, through members questioning mods.
i don't think ban's tags will include allocation to individual mods?

Quote from: Quickseller on November 11, 2016, 01:25:16 PM

When you make it public that someone is banned, you make them vulnerable to imposters impersonating them in order to make it appear that the banned user is (attempting to) evading their ban.

Especially considering that the member's table as of mid last year is nearly public, it is not difficult to make it appear that you are an alt of a specific user from an admin's point of view.

makes little sense to me. if an account is banned, that "imposter" would be nuked i'm guessing. who cares.

Lutpin

copper member

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1874

Goodbye, Z.

Quote from: Quickseller on November 11, 2016, 01:25:16 PM

When you make it public that someone is banned, you make them vulnerable to imposters impersonating them in order to make it appear that the banned user is (attempting to) evading their ban.

What damage would that do to a user that is banned permanently already anyway?
You are be thinking about temporarily banned users, which would be banned longer/permanently if evading their ban?

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: deisik on November 11, 2016, 01:18:29 PM

This is not an idea, this is a gut feeling of sorts. I heavily suspect that this type of "clarity" may raise more questions than solve. If some user gets banned, and that pitiful fact is publicly announced (by bestowing the Banned rank on him), the majority of the forum members would like to know what this particular user has been banned for, who exactly banned him, and so on. If this info is provided (as it should be), some people may start asking themselves how come that some mods are giving out more bans than others...

And question if they aren't abusing the ban-hammer?

No, I don't see that happening (occasional question or two is normal for everything). Do not push for extremities. There is a very small group of people that are able to ban users, and that includes administrators and *some* global moderators. Information about bans will not likely be given out (unless a moderator comes forward stating that they've banned someone which is fine). Those questions really serve no purpose anyways.

I've yet to see proper concerns against this, besides: 1) Account farmer(s) fighting against it. 2) Concerns that it may not be really useful.

Update:

Quote from: Quickseller on November 11, 2016, 01:25:16 PM

When you make it public that someone is banned, you make them vulnerable to imposters impersonating them in order to make it appear that the banned user is (attempting to) evading their ban.

I do not see anything that prevents this from already happening, especially in permanent bans where the signature and profile information is removed?

Quickseller

copper member

Activity: 2996

Merit: 2374

When you make it public that someone is banned, you make them vulnerable to imposters impersonating them in order to make it appear that the banned user is (attempting to) evading their ban.

Especially considering that the member's table as of mid last year is nearly public, it is not difficult to make it appear that you are an alt of a specific user from an admin's point of view.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: rizzlarolla on November 11, 2016, 12:57:29 PM

^^^ "If your point is punishment (which seems to be the case)," ^^^

where did you get that idea?
i'm pretty sure the purpose is not further punishment, it is for clarity.

This is not an idea, this is a gut feeling of sorts. I heavily suspect that this type of "clarity" may raise more questions than solve. If some user gets banned, and that pitiful fact is publicly announced (by bestowing the Banned rank on him), the majority of the forum members would like to know what this particular user has been banned for, who exactly banned him, and so on. If this info is provided (as it should be), some people may start asking themselves how come that some mods are giving out more bans than others...

And question if they aren't abusing the ban hammer?

rizzlarolla

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1001

^^^ "If your point is punishment (which seems to be the case)," ^^^

where did you get that idea?
i'm pretty sure the purpose is not further punishment, it is for clarity.

---------------

bit of off topic fun, click on theymos show posts!
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/theymos-35

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3514

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: Lauda on November 08, 2016, 06:13:11 PM

I was recommended to create a thread and check whether there was demand for the user rank 'Banned'. I'm aware that this has been suggested and denied by BadBear in the past. With the addition of this rank I see a fair amount of potential in aiding the analysis and fight against spam & account farmers done by the community. However please note that, in this suggestion we are only considering users that are permanently banned.

So: Any thoughts, suggestions, concerns? Is this a good or a bad idea?

If users are banned permanently (for whatever reason), what is the purpose of labeling such users as banned? In any case, they won't be spamming any longer, but ultimately everyone should decide for themselves if the victim of the ban-hammer has been actually posting crap (so mods will be more careful about giving out bans). If your point is punishment (which seems to be the case), then getting a perma ban as such will evidently suffice. I don't think that adding an extra level of punishment by making the punishment public will do any good for the forum. So I'm with BadBear on this...

TLDR: the idea is meaningless

rizzlarolla

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Lutpin on November 08, 2016, 06:43:13 PM

The only reason I can see for it being denied back then would be because the original suggestion included non-permanently banned accounts, is that correct?
Could you link to the thread back then (if there was one) or at least give the reasoning from BadBear why exactly something like this was not whished?

Quote from: redsn0w on November 11, 2016, 10:06:13 AM

Bad idea, I suggested this few months ago (maybe more than 1 year ago) and BadBear said it was a bad idea :/. I don't remember why, maybe privacy reason...

i presume these to be the relevant threads? The first (started by redsnOw) seems more about general reporting. nearly 2 years ago.
the second is about banned tag, but doesn't really go anywhere. redsnOw links back to first thread.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9885941 - linked to page 2 where i think BadBear first posts.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/banned-users-948415

Quote from: LaudaIsFucker on November 11, 2016, 12:26:55 AM

...RIZZAROLLA ...

Quote from: Lauda on November 11, 2016, 08:53:03 AM

...rizzarolla...

i thought that was me for a moment... very similar username.

Topic: [Interest Check] - User Rank 'Banned' - page 3. (Read 6047 times)