UKBouldering.com
the site => site notices and updates => Topic started by: Bubba on October 22, 2004, 11:48:09 am
-
In light of the few bannings we've had which have been a bit random - I feel a proper policy should be in place. I'm adopting a system similar to that in place in other forums.
By signing up the these forums you are bound by these conditions. If you don't like that, then don't sign up.
Ban levels
1. Initial warning - one of the mods will PM you to say you're being out of order and why. He/she will also post in the private moderators forum to explain the decision to the mod team.
2. 24 hour ban.
3. 7 day ban.
4. Permanent ban.
If you get to a 7 day ban (or any other stage), then "reform" for three months, your slate will be wiped clean.
These ban conditions are for the majority of cases but if you're really out of order then you'll just get banned immediately - this applies to known troublemakers from other forums, people who just sign up to flame, etc, etc. And lastly, you might just not be welcome here - ie I don't like you ;)
I know this seems over officious but a proper upfront policy is the only way to be fair to all users.
What is a bannable offence?
I think we all know what is and what isn't acceptable on this forum but for the benefits of new or recent users.
- Trolling and malicious hijacking of topics.
- Personal insults/attacks/threats - we're all adults, keep it civil. If somebody is trolling or attacking the community then fair enough...but it's better to do it without direct insults if you can.
- Hatred: Sexism/Racism/etc - most of us know what is and isn't acceptable and what is and isn't real hatred.
- Arguing with moderator's decisions on the public forum. Feel free to contact the mod team if you disagree with a decision but do it privately. If you're banned then use the email contact form.
- Spamming the forum in any way, i.e. no we don't want to buy your dick pills thanks.
- Links to illegal content - e.g. don't post an e2dk or torrent link to illegal software on the public forums. Don't post kiddie pr0n, how to make bombs, etc.
- Abuse of the PM system. Either spamming other users or sending insults /threats/etc. Although we have never yet needed to read anybody's PMs, it is possible to do so and accusations of such abuse will be investigated.
- Posting personal information that is not your own without direct consent from the party involved. e.g. don't give out somebody's address or phone number unless they want you to.
- Sharing an account with another person. Ok, if it's your partner then we'll let it slip, but anyone else is not allowed. It's not hard to sign up, so don't be lazy.
Anything Else?
Don't resort to critcising people's grammar or spelling when arguing/debating - firstly it's rather scraping the insults barrel; secondly people often type to forums quickly whilst at work, etc; and lastly some people may be dyslexic.
These rules are subject to ongoing changes and refinement - I won't even pretend to have sorted a great rules policy first try.
-
Do we have the right to a lawyer? Appeal at high court?
-
you have the right to take the fifth. and thats it.
-
The new version of the forum implements a "yellow card" system which will probably be an easier way to do this.
Any registered user can report a particular post by giving it a blue card.
Mods can give users yellow cards which will replace your warning - when a certain number (10 currently) of yellow cards have been issued, you get a red-card (ie bannned) - the above rules would then apply.
-
Take heed cofield, a moderator has decided that his apple IS bigger and better than your orange. Read the mans lips, under Bannable Offences
Arguing with moderator's decisions on the public forum.
-
http://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,19896.msg413799.html#msg413799 (http://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,19896.msg413799.html#msg413799)
That and unjustifiably smiting rodma.
I'd rather have the kid gone, and Adge back.
-
No way, he said he doesn't like cac t-shirts, and explicitly stated he had no prob with people donating to cancer charities. I think rodmas smite was harsh, and 39 just gave it back. FWIW I think there's better ways of contributing toward the fight against cancer than buying a colourful t-shirt, and also don't like the idea that I ought to buy one (explicit as in Shaunas blog, or implied) just because I'm a climber.
-
Cheers Duma! You make the point better than I did.
Being the 'kid' does make me feel younger than my 30 years... ;)
-
Harbirch, I know that. But he seemed to have something to contribute to this forum, as a comparison.
Duma, I don't mind posting something negative or critical about a "sacred" target like CAC (e.g. your post), it's just the total lack of purpose / entertainment value. If you're going to post something against a well-meaning charity at least it should be amusing or informative.
-
It wasn't supposed to be funny. I just said what I felt. I even said 'lame' instead of 'gay' so I didn't upset Bubba.
People found the CAB thing pretty funny a few months back (perhaps I should have posted it on here), Stu even made a t-shirt.
-
- Arguing with moderator's decisions on the public forum. Feel free to contact the mod team if you disagree with a decision but do it privately. If you're banned then use the email contact form.
I would like to suggest that I dont really like this rule, and it feels a bit UKC ish, but I can't ;) allegedly :)
-
I vote the "kid" be more than entitled to his opinion and I defend to my utmost his right to express it here.
Naivety is no crime, neither demonstrated by UKB posters or young well intention rock athletes.
How can you expect to modify an opinion you are unaware of?
Smiling is surely for unimportant issues like grades?
-
Damn phone! Smiting. Intentioned. You know what I mean!
-
I liked the first version ;)
-
I smited Three Nine because his underlying point - that wearing clothing to show you support a cause commonly deemed as 'worthy' can be done for less than the purest of pure reasons (and who can really say what other people really think) isn't exactly a revolutionary idea and most people are already aware of this. It isn't hard, especially for an 'adult' in his thirties, to realise this is a highly charged and emotive subject for lots of people and he could just as effectively expressed his simple point using tact and showing basic regard to people facing horrible circumstances - there's rocking the boat then there's being a deliberate social hand-grenade (aka a troll). I can't think of anything good about Three Nine's approach and contribution here. To say something 'a bit controversial' with willful disregard for upsetting others when the same point could be reached with a little diplomacy and without losing any clarity of argument just leaves a really bad taste. Because it leaves a bad taste is it worthy of banning? Probably not but I wouldn't miss those sort of posts.