quote:I assume this is some personal attack thread from Bob, he seems to define himself as some sort of liberal attack robot for the list. I will not define myself as his adversary, I am not going to read this thread, nor do I intend to allow Bob try to pidgeon hole me and run me off with his barking.
Oh, dear. Listen here, Private Sax (yes, I've demoted you) -- I'm maybe the least partisan person here (I hate the system in general, and think both parties are mainly staffed with people who'd have trouble naming the three branches of government) and I find your posts tiresome, reactionary, and generally way off the mark. And let me assure you it has nothing to do with their content. Rather, it's the general tone you use to address people* that makes me hope that the internet fairy will come in the night and take away your cable modem.
Everything's not just black and white, y'know. The world's a far more complicated and interesting place than that.
*yes, people. They might just be screennames to you, but behind almost all of them is a real person -- a person who deserves at least as much courtesy as they've shown you.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
Why do the mods have to be tolerant of repeated behavior that causes threads to be deleted? Why can't they ban the poster that causes the problems? Why close the thread, when the offending poster's posts can be deleted or edited? You see, I haven't really noticed that General Sax exists, because I don't really frequent many political threads, but it seems to me that, if he's really that disruptive and breaking the TOS, that he should be banned.
There will always be people like him. Why do they need to be tolerated? Is there not some sort of scale that could keep track of each offense, with ever-increasing consequences?
I could say why don't the other posters here just ignore the General Saxes of hatrack, but I know that will never work. There will always be *someone* who has to respond. So that just brings me back to the moderators, and why they don't just ban him?
Posts: 2880 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
One of the things I like about Hatrack is that they don' "just ban" people all the time. I can't remember the last time someone got banned, and I have never known about a ban that wasn't deserved....or at least one that the person wasn't warned about before it happened.
Most web sites are not as tolerant, but that is part of the reason I don't frequent most other web sites.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm just excited that we have our very own attack robot. I was going to ask for one for Christmas!
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Katarain, The de facto policy of Hatrack seems to be to give people every opportunity to learn to play nice or go away on their own before actually banning them. I kind of appreciate that, know if I ever go over the line, I'll at least be warned before being shut out.
As for deleting posts rather than locking, well, that would be an admin nightmare. Hatrack moves too quickly sometimes. Far better (IMO) to lock the thread and give people some time to cool off rather than to jump in and take sides (possibly without having time to judge context and culpability) and perhaps make the whole situation worse. I would have no problem with a feature preventing deletion of the initial post. (Note, I'd still like the power to modify my initial posts, but if I don't like a thread, I can make the first post blank and blank out the title, and/or I can ask to have it locked or removed.)
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
.![[Wink]](wink.gif)
.
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
