# mod/ban questions



## exile in thighville (Feb 21, 2010)

1. is there a list of moderators on the forum somewhere? can the color of mods' names be altered to red or something so people - especially non-veterans who may be at a disadvantage when it comes to board skirmishes - know who they are?

2. the "ghost" bans, why are they considered effective? do dims members agree or disagree that it is good to keep banned members' banned status secret?

3. true/false: do members of dims have a right to know who has been banned and why?

if this thread is removed i'd like to request the answers in advance via pm, though i posted the questions publicly because i think they're worth discussing.


----------



## NancyGirl74 (Feb 21, 2010)

exile in thighville said:


> 1. is there a list of moderators on the forum somewhere? can the color of mods' names be altered to red or something so people - especially non-veterans who may be at a disadvantage when it comes to board skirmishes - know who they are?
> 
> 2. the "ghost" bans, why are they considered effective? do dims members agree or disagree that it is good to keep banned members' banned status secret?
> 
> ...



1. Yeah there's a list somewhere. I think it's on the bottom of the board pages. Like the Lounge mods are listed at the bottom of the lounge pages. 

I don't think the mods need to be color coded. They are regular posters here too and not every comment is a mod comment. Lots of them say things like "Mod hat on" to let us know when they are acting as a mod and not making a personal statement.

I've often thought they should have different names from their regular handles but I'm not sure that would work in the long run. *shrug*

2/3. I don't think it's anyone's biz to know when someone has been banned. That's between that person, the mods, and Conrad. Seriously, with the PM network and the gossiping do you really think too much stays secret long anyway? At least out of respect the attempt should be made to keep private matters private...even though chances are pretty good they won't.


----------



## CrankySpice (Feb 21, 2010)

I agree with Nancy. If a person is banned/put on time out, that's really none of our business, although we may want to know why with a hot burning passion. And, as Nancy also said, that information - correct or not - generally trickles down eventually.

Really, we're all moderators to some extent - anyone can report any post as being questionable. So color-coding Mods makes no sense to me, unless we all get a scarlet R on our chests for reporting a post we find questionable/offensive.


----------



## kayrae (Feb 21, 2010)

I do think it's our business to know who is banned here. If my favorite posters are getting banned, I want to know because it changes whether or not I want to continue contributing my ideas and thoughts here. I've said this in a different thread before, but Dimensions is no longer a magazine. All new content are generated by the people who choose to participate in the discussions. Banning someone "secretively" is shady and I don't like it. You don't need to tell me WHY they're banned, but I most certainly want to know that it happened. Why was it OK to have "banned" under someone's username before but now it's not?


----------



## Creepytastic (Feb 21, 2010)

who was banned?


----------



## kayrae (Feb 21, 2010)

my mom hahahahaha


----------



## Red (Feb 21, 2010)

kayrae said:


> I do think it's our business to know who is banned here. If my favorite posters are getting banned, I want to know because it changes whether or not I want to continue contributing my ideas and thoughts here. I've said this in a different thread before, but Dimensions is no longer a magazine. All new content are generated by the people who choose to participate in the discussions. Banning someone "secretively" is shady and I don't like it. You don't need to tell me WHY they're banned, but I most certainly want to know that it happened. Why was it OK to have "banned" under someone's username before but now it's not?



Exactly, all this secrecy is unnecessary, just to reiterate I'm not asking for the sordid details. It would just be good to know that when/if someone suddenly stops posting the difference between them having chosen not to participate or being bullied into it without explanation. UNFAIR


----------



## CleverBomb (Feb 21, 2010)

Labeling a poster as "banned" by replacing their User Title automatically casts aspersions on all of their posts, including those that were not offensive.

Also, (as Kayrae mentioned above) the appearance that "stealth-banned" posters are still associated with this forum may tend to misrepresent the nature of the forum community. It may be useful for temporary suspensions of posting privileges, but "stealth perma-banning" is a deceptive practice.

I don't see it going away, though, as there are significant incentives to continue it. 

-Rusty


----------



## Cors (Feb 21, 2010)

What Kayrae said!


----------



## CleverBomb (Feb 21, 2010)

Red said:


> Exactly, all this secrecy is unnecessary, just to reiterate I'm not asking for the sordid details. It would just be good to know that when/if someone suddenly stops posting the difference between them having chosen not to participate or being bullied into it without explanation. UNFAIR


...or being prohibited from continuing to participate.

-Rusty


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 21, 2010)

exile in thighville said:


> 1. is there a list of moderators on the forum somewhere? can the color of mods' names be altered to red or something so people - especially non-veterans who may be at a disadvantage when it comes to board skirmishes - know who they are?



_Dan, on the main forums page - if you scroll way down to almost the bottom of the page - there is a link that says "View Forum Leaders". Click there, it gives you the list of all moderators and what forums they are assigned to moderate. It is not a secret who the mods here are. _



exile in thighville said:


> 2. the "ghost" bans, why are they considered effective? do dims members agree or disagree that it is good to keep banned members' banned status secret?





exile in thighville said:


> 3. true/false: do members of dims have a right to know who has been banned and why?



RE banning: 

_Dims regards banning as a confidential matter. 

In other words Dan, *"if"* you get banned and you want to tell everyone about it, and why you were banned then you are welcome to do so. Conrad and the moderators will not violate your confidentiality and talk about it with anyone else, as it is not anyone else business but yours._

/Moderator


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 21, 2010)

I do have a problem with secret bannings. More than once I have been in correspondence with people here in threads and then the person suddenly disappears. I don't know what happened to them. I'm sitting up here waiting for them to respond and thinking the worst. Are they dead? Are they sick? Did Ike get out of jail early? What happened? That was really scary and so unpleasant. How about a little 'banned' or 'timeout' note or something?


----------



## kayrae (Feb 21, 2010)

And to second Lilly's statement, I arrange meet-ups in the SF Bay area. When I start a meet-up thread, it's disconcerting to all of a sudden not know why previous active members aren't responding to my PMs. It would be a nice gesture to know that they were banned instead of wondering why the threads are quiet.


----------



## Cat (Feb 21, 2010)

The infractions are usually public so bannings should be, too.


----------



## Cors (Feb 21, 2010)

Another issue is that some people are not told why they are banned, but their passwords suddenly stopped working and they can't post.


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 21, 2010)

LillyBBBW said:


> I do have a problem with secret bannings. More than once I have been in correspondence with people here in threads and then the person suddenly disappears. I don't know what happened to them. I'm sitting up here waiting for them to respond and thinking the worst. Are they dead? Are they sick? Did Ike get out of jail early? What happened? That was really scary and so unpleasant. How about a little 'banned' or 'timeout' note or something?


 
I can understand your concern about someone suddenly not being here. However if they are banned or timed out, we will not give out information about why that happened because of confidentiality. You can email the person and ask them directly - but we (Dims mods) will not be divulging that info.


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 21, 2010)

Cors said:


> Another issue is that some people are not told why they are banned, but their passwords suddenly stopped working and they can't post.



Cors,

Regarding Banning: 

I can guarantee you that if people are banned, they know exactly why they are banned. Banning doesn't happen "for no reason" here. Banning only happens after numerous infractions, bad behavior, disruptive posting, etc. 

You see this is the confidentiality issue. We don't tell you all about the 5 infractions and 4 time outs and and 25 train wreck posts (that were deleted) from poster SuzieSweetCheeks* prior to her* permanent banning. It's no else business. (*hypothetical name) So, you can rest assured that when someone is banned it is for a very specific and valid reason. 

Regarding Passwords:

If someone is having trouble with their password, they can contact Conrad directly.


----------



## kayrae (Feb 21, 2010)

I agree re: confidentiality issues. But all I want to know is that they're banned and that's the reason why they're not posting anymore.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 21, 2010)

kayrae said:


> I agree re: confidentiality issues. But all I want to know is that they're banned and that's the reason why they're not posting anymore.



I agree. Most of my correspondence happens here and it's fairly friendly. If they suddenly stop posting and PM's go unanswered the likelyhood that I can contact them via email or that there is a level of familiarity for me to do so is low. When she didn't respond to my PM I assumed it was because she didn't want to. I didn't think SusieSweetCheeks got banned and the evidence was removed. Goodness, it only takes a couple of seconds to put "TimeOut" someplace since they can't do it themselves. Nothing further would be needed.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Feb 21, 2010)

kayrae said:


> I agree re: confidentiality issues. But all I want to know is that they're banned and that's the reason why they're not posting anymore.



What confidentiality issues though? That's what I don't understand. If someone was being a dick on a particular thread or makes it a habit to be a dick in general then anyone who spends any amount of time around here knows who they are. Deleted posts are usually no secret either. The stealth bannings of late have begun to feel more personal in nature and it just makes participating here a bit uncomfortable.

Eta: I don't want to know why people were banned, I spend enough time here and am aware of enough people's personalities to usually make an educated guess. I just think there is no harm in putting banned or on time out in someone's user title so that people don't waste their time trying to engage someone that can't respond. If that's what was done before why is it different now?


----------



## kayrae (Feb 21, 2010)

This is the confidentiality issue I'm agreeing with. And yes, the stealth bannings seem personal.



Sandie S-R said:


> You see this is the confidentiality issue. We don't tell you all about the 5 infractions and 4 time outs and and 25 train wreck posts (that were deleted) from poster SuzieSweetCheeks* prior to her* permanent banning. It's no else business. (*hypothetical name) So, you can rest assured that when someone is banned it is for a very specific and valid reason.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 21, 2010)

fatgirlflyin said:


> What confidentiality issues though? That's what I don't understand. If someone was being a dick on a particular thread or makes it a habit to be a dick in general then anyone who spends any amount of time around here knows who they are. Deleted posts are usually no secret either. The stealth bannings of late have begun to feel more personal in nature and it just makes participating here a bit uncomfortable.



I'm not so much worried about all that. I know that people aren't all candy coated and wonderful all the time. We all have it in us to be bitchy and uncooperative when we're pissed off. it would just help sometimes to see something that indicates a dormancy. Then I can just say, Oh Susie must've flipped out I'll wait till she's back. Banning usually comes with enough warnings for it not to come as a shock to the person but if it happened in a thread that I've not participated in, how am I supposed to know?


----------



## toni (Feb 21, 2010)

fatgirlflyin said:


> What confidentiality issues though? That's what I don't understand.



Exactly! If you messed up and get banned, what privacy or confidentiality are you owed?


----------



## Haunted (Feb 21, 2010)

Never Mind


----------



## Blackjack (Feb 21, 2010)

Cat said:


> The infractions are usually public so bannings should be, too.



Infractions aren't shown publicly.

If they were, Mini's profile wouldn't have any room for anything else.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 21, 2010)

I got an infraction not too long ago and the post in question was marked by the Mods with a red mark and had some sharp wording about why it was rude and offensive and whatnot. I'd never seen any other post marked up like that so I just assumed it was something only visable to me and no one else.


----------



## Cat (Feb 21, 2010)

Infractions = the actual act(s) of rulebreaking.
I'm not talking of the slaps on the wrist for the infractions.



Blackjack said:


> Infractions aren't shown publicly.
> 
> If they were, Mini's profile wouldn't have any room for anything else.


----------



## Blackjack (Feb 21, 2010)

Cat said:


> Infractions = the actual act(s) of rulebreaking.
> I'm not talking of the slaps on the wrist for the infractions.



Ohhhh, okay. I thought you meant the little notes that you see when you go to your own profile.


----------



## NancyGirl74 (Feb 21, 2010)

toni said:


> Exactly! If you messed up and get banned, what privacy or confidentiality are you owed?




Sorry, but if I'm banned for repeatedly being nasty to one particular poster that's between me, that poster and the mods. If I'm banned for very forcibly and repeatedly objecting to the content here at Dims AND I have many supporters on my side than I can see the powers-that-be making some sort of announcement about the TOPIC. Not the specific person. Again, to me its about respect. If the banned party wants to share the reason they feel they were banned then they have plenty of options to go about doing that...Quite frankly, it's been done before. Through the grapevine alone I've learned stuff that I didn't even know was going on behind the scenes. If you think it's a secret, think again. 

The mods should remain as objective and professional (for lack of a better word) as possible. If Mod Molly says "I banned FatLovinFool because he was excessively abusive in his posts to TheMerryFatGirl AND I have also received several PMed complaints AND I simply don't like FatLovinFool as a person" then that's just rude and disrespectful. Maybe FatLovinFool is a major tool. That doesn't mean the people who are supposed to be above the pettiness should be petty in return. Do we really want that kind of person moderating our boards? I don't.

There have been times when I have disagreed with how the mods rule. Sometimes I have voiced my opinion. Still, I would like to know that if I did get banned they wouldn't go running to the nearest thread to post the why and wherefore. Especially, since I've been banned I can't give my side of the story. I would like to think that the mods here are just a bit more respectful and above such childishness.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Feb 21, 2010)

I dont think anyone asked for the why's just for the heads up that the person just isn't able to answer (by their own doing, or the doing of a mod) if someone is engaging them in a thread. 



NancyGirl74 said:


> Sorry, but if I'm banned for repeatedly being nasty to one particular poster that's between me, that poster and the mods. If I'm banned for very forcibly and repeatedly objecting to the content here at Dims AND I have many supporters on my side than I can see the powers-that-be making some sort of announcement about the TOPIC. Not the specific person. Again, to me its about respect. If the banned party wants to share the reason they feel they were banned then they have plenty of options to go about doing that...Quite frankly, it's been done before. Through the grapevine alone I've learned stuff that I didn't even know was going on behind the scenes. If you think it's a secret, think again.
> 
> The mods should remain as objective and professional (for lack of a better word) as possible. If Mod Molly says "I banned FatLovinFool because he was excessively abusive in his posts to TheMerryFatGirl AND I have also received several PMed complaints AND I simply don't like FatLovinFool as a person" then that's just rude and disrespectful. Maybe FatLovinFool is a major tool. That doesn't mean the people who are supposed to be above the pettiness should be petty in return. Do we really want that kind of person moderating our boards? I don't.
> 
> There have been times when I have disagreed with how the mods rule. Sometimes I have voiced my opinion. Still, I would like to know that if I did get banned they wouldn't go running to the nearest thread to post the why and wherefore. Especially, since I've been banned I can't give my side of the story. I would like to think that the mods here are just a bit more respectful and above such childishness.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 21, 2010)

NancyGirl74 said:


> Sorry, but if I'm banned for repeatedly being nasty to one particular poster that's between me, that poster and the mods. If I'm banned for very forcibly and repeatedly objecting to the content here at Dims AND I have many supporters on my side than I can see the powers-that-be making some sort of announcement about the TOPIC. Not the specific person. Again, to me its about respect. If the banned party wants to share the reason they feel they were banned then they have plenty of options to go about doing that...Quite frankly, it's been done before. Through the grapevine alone I've learned stuff that I didn't even know was going on behind the scenes. If you think it's a secret, think again.
> 
> The mods should remain as objective and professional (for lack of a better word) as possible. If Mod Molly says "I banned FatLovinFool because he was excessively abusive in his posts to TheMerryFatGirl AND I have also received several PMed complaints AND I simply don't like FatLovinFool as a person" then that's just rude and disrespectful. Maybe FatLovinFool is a major tool. That doesn't mean the people who are supposed to be above the pettiness should be petty in return. Do we really want that kind of person moderating our boards? I don't.
> 
> There have been times when I have disagreed with how the mods rule. Sometimes I have voiced my opinion. *Still, I would like to know that if I did get banned they wouldn't go running to the nearest thread to post the why and wherefore. Especially, since I've been banned I can't give my side of the story. *I would like to think that the mods here are just a bit more respectful and above such childishness.



That's the bottom line and I totally agree there. I would just like to know that the person IS banned so that I won't sit there talking to them like a fool.


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 21, 2010)

NancyGirl74 said:


> ....snip... There have been times when I have disagreed with how the mods rule. Sometimes I have voiced my opinion. Still, I would like to know that if I did get banned they wouldn't go running to the nearest thread to post the why and wherefore. Especially, since I've been banned I can't give my side of the story. I would like to think that the mods here are just a bit more respectful and above such childishness....snip....



Thanks Nancy, that was exactly the point I was trying to make.


----------



## toni (Feb 21, 2010)

NancyGirl74 said:


> Sorry, but if I'm banned for repeatedly being nasty to one particular poster that's between me, that poster and the mods. If I'm banned for very forcibly and repeatedly objecting to the content here at Dims AND I have many supporters on my side than I can see the powers-that-be making some sort of announcement about the TOPIC. Not the specific person. Again, to me its about respect. If the banned party wants to share the reason they feel they were banned then they have plenty of options to go about doing that...Quite frankly, it's been done before. Through the grapevine alone I've learned stuff that I didn't even know was going on behind the scenes. If you think it's a secret, think again.
> 
> The mods should remain as objective and professional (for lack of a better word) as possible. If Mod Molly says "I banned FatLovinFool because he was excessively abusive in his posts to TheMerryFatGirl AND I have also received several PMed complaints AND I simply don't like FatLovinFool as a person" then that's just rude and disrespectful. Maybe FatLovinFool is a major tool. That doesn't mean the people who are supposed to be above the pettiness should be petty in return. Do we really want that kind of person moderating our boards? I don't.
> 
> There have been times when I have disagreed with how the mods rule. Sometimes I have voiced my opinion. Still, I would like to know that if I did get banned they wouldn't go running to the nearest thread to post the why and wherefore. Especially, since I've been banned I can't give my side of the story. I would like to think that the mods here are just a bit more respectful and above such childishness.




I wasn't asking for a detailed explanation of why they were banned. Writing banned under their name and noting why somewhere in their profile would be enough. 

Fatgirllover-Banned due to repeated harassment

There you go, no privacy being trampled. Most of the those things you mentioned above would be squashed. The rumors and lies would be curbed because everyone would know the basic reason.


----------



## bigsexy920 (Feb 21, 2010)

I know my opinion on this but really who cares.


----------



## kayrae (Feb 21, 2010)

I care. (I feel like a PBS special)


----------



## indy500tchr (Feb 21, 2010)

I know this question has been posed already but it has not been answered. 

Why can't the word 'banned' or 'on a time out' be put under a person's avatar anymore? I've seen the word banned under names before when I scroll through posts. Why has this changed?


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 21, 2010)

indy500tchr said:


> I know this question has been posed already but it has not been answered.
> 
> Why can't the word 'banned' or 'on a time out' be put under a person's avatar anymore? I've seen the word banned under names before when I scroll through posts. Why has this changed?



That's what I'M saying! This is so silly. It's bad enough to bann someone but doing so without letting people know the reasons behind why they don't respond to requests or inquiries affects their relationships with people here in a way that doesn't fit whatever crime they are guilty of.


----------



## Isa (Feb 21, 2010)

indy500tchr said:


> I know this question has been posed already but it has not been answered.
> 
> Why can't the word 'banned' or 'on a time out' be put under a person's avatar anymore? I've seen the word banned under names before when I scroll through posts. Why has this changed?



This really is what everyone is asking. No one needs to know detailed reasons concerning the banning but having the actual words listed (as they were in the past) makes it easier on the remaining members and the threads in general. 

Right or wrong, the stealth aspect gives the bannings an appearance of being personal since it appears to be happening to the most vocal on the forum.


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 21, 2010)

indy500tchr said:


> I know this question has been posed already but it has not been answered.
> 
> Why can't the word 'banned' or 'on a time out' be put under a person's avatar anymore? I've seen the word banned under names before when I scroll through posts. Why has this changed?



When people are banned or in a time out - it automatically says "on time out" in their user title. 

That is already happening.


----------



## TotallyReal (Feb 21, 2010)

"On Time Out"


----------



## Haunted (Feb 22, 2010)

Sandie S-R said:


> When people are banned or in a time out - it automatically says "on time out" in their user title.
> 
> That is already happening.



id prefer "in The Naughty Corner"


----------



## exile in thighville (Feb 22, 2010)

Isa said:


> Right or wrong, the stealth aspect gives the bannings an appearance of being personal since it appears to be happening to the most vocal on the forum.



right. because they are.


----------



## GoldenDelicious (Feb 22, 2010)

Sandie S-R said:


> When people are banned or in a time out - it automatically says "on time out" in their user title.
> 
> That is already happening.


It doesn't say banned under mergirl's avatar yet and she has been, for some time now. I know this is the same for a few other people too. As Lilly mentions, Mer doesn't want anyone to think she is being rude when she can't reply to them.


----------



## NancyGirl74 (Feb 22, 2010)

fatgirlflyin said:


> I dont think anyone asked for the why's just for the heads up that the person just isn't able to answer (by their own doing, or the doing of a mod) if someone is engaging them in a thread.





LillyBBBW said:


> That's the bottom line and I totally agree there. I would just like to know that the person IS banned so that I won't sit there talking to them like a fool.



Maybe I'm thinking too personally on this (not that I've ever been in danger of being banned...at least not that I know of *worries*) but if for whatever reason I got myself into deep doo-doo and was timed-out or banned for good I don't think I would want that under my name. Its like being the kid in school who is made to sit in the corner with a dunce cap on. If I'm never to return I don't want BANNED to be the last thing people see of me. Let me fade off into the sunset in a shroud of mystery to become a Dims Urban Myth (yeah, that would be cool). I can see that I the minority in this but that's how I would feel if I was banned. 



toni said:


> The rumors and lies would be curbed because everyone would know the basic reason.



I dunno, Toni. I don't think too many things will ever curb rumors and lies especially when a scandal is involved. The truth might be there but with each telling it's going to be more sensational and less accurate no matter how truthful people try to be. 



bigsexy920 said:


> I know my opinion on this but really who cares.



I care!



kayrae said:


> I care. (I feel like a PBS special)



Yeah, what she said.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 22, 2010)

GoldenDelicious said:


> It doesn't say banned under mergirl's avatar yet and she has been, for some time now. I know this is the same for a few other people too. As Lilly mentions, Mer doesn't want anyone to think she is being rude when she can't reply to them.



I figured she might have been banned. Thanks for saying something GD. I honestly didn't know if she'd been banned or if she got mad and left. I hadn't heard from her in a while, I wondered if maybe she was mad at me for something. The atmosphere had been so disagreeable before her disappearance that anything was possible. Is all of this really necessary? What the hell has happened to everybody?


----------



## LoveBHMS (Feb 22, 2010)

I know nothing about the moderation or administration of this site, and with maybe two exceptions the mods hate me, so what i'm saying is not at all personal, just maybe a possibility.

i had an issue with a particular poster and reported it. In a PM with a mod, i asked why the person was not on time-out and the mod said she was. i said it was not in the user title where others say "on vacation" or "on timeout" or "banned" and the mod said she did not know why that was the case, just as Sandy SR said so a couple of posts upthread on here. Maybe mods don't know exactly what somebody's user title says at a given time.


----------



## Wagimawr (Feb 22, 2010)

LillyBBBW said:


> I honestly didn't know if she'd been banned or if she got mad and left.


This is exactly the problem.


----------



## Mini (Feb 22, 2010)

Ooh, ooh, someone PM me the list of all the suspected banees. I want to know who I can talk shit about sans repercussions.


----------



## James (Feb 22, 2010)

Sandie S-R said:


> When people are banned or in a time out - it automatically says "on time out" in their user title.
> 
> That is already happening.



Sandie, I think that changed a few months ago when the updated infraction system was put in place.


----------



## KHayes666 (Feb 22, 2010)

LillyBBBW said:


> I got an infraction not too long ago and the post in question was marked by the Mods with a red mark and had some sharp wording about why it was rude and offensive and whatnot. I'd never seen any other post marked up like that so I just assumed it was something only visable to me and no one else.




I too have a similar post, but my question is can others see the infraction marker or is it privy to just the poster?


----------



## tonynyc (Feb 22, 2010)

KHayes666 said:


> I too have a similar post, but my question is can others see the infraction marker or is it privy to just the poster?



* The Red Infraction Marker!!!* shades of catholic school....


----------



## Paquito (Feb 22, 2010)

GoldenDelicious said:


> It doesn't say banned under mergirl's avatar yet and she has been, for some time now. I know this is the same for a few other people too. As Lilly mentions, Mer doesn't want anyone to think she is being rude when she can't reply to them.



I was curious about this too. But I dunno, last time I checked Mer's profile I could still PM her and all that. Plus, she still has an avatar and profile picture. For example, when FLW was put on time out, her avatar vanished.

So yea, I'm very confused about it all.


----------



## KHayes666 (Feb 22, 2010)

tonynyc said:


> * The Red Infraction Marker!!!* shades of catholic school....



Catholic Memorial.....will Waltham ever beat them in Super 8?


----------



## indy500tchr (Feb 22, 2010)

James said:


> Sandie, I think that changed a few months ago when the updated infraction system was put in place.



Why has this policy changed? It would be really nice to keep things consistent so that assumptions and negative threads don't have to be started making more work and drama for the mods.


----------



## Mathias (Feb 22, 2010)

indy500tchr said:


> Why has this policy changed? It would be really nice to keep things consistent so that assumptions and negative threads don't have to be started making more work and drama for the mods.



Furthermore, I think there should be/have been an announcement made at the top of the forum if policy changed around here. If it's done to ask for donations or to promote bashes, why not this?


----------



## Ash (Feb 22, 2010)

indy500tchr said:


> Why has this policy changed? It would be really nice to keep things consistent so that assumptions and negative threads don't have to be started making more work and drama for the mods.





Mathias said:


> Furthermore, I think there should be/have been an announcement made at the top of the forum if policy changed around here. If it's done to ask for donations or to promote bashes, why not this?



I don't think James was suggesting that the policy (or any board rules, etc.) changed. I read it as him saying that the way the system handles infractions was changed.


----------



## Allie Cat (Feb 22, 2010)

I gots me a question about infractions.

I don't think I've ever had one. How would I find out if I had?


----------



## Blackjack (Feb 22, 2010)

Divals said:


> I gots me a question about infractions.
> 
> I don't think I've ever had one. How would I find out if I had?



It'll show up on your User CP below your subscribed threads and above your rep.


----------



## Allie Cat (Feb 22, 2010)

Blackjack said:


> It'll show up on your User CP below your subscribed threads and above your rep.



Ohhh. Thanks ^^


----------



## James (Feb 22, 2010)

Ashley said:


> I don't think James was suggesting that the policy (or any board rules, etc.) changed. I read it as him saying that the way the system handles infractions was changed.



Yep. Thats exactly what I meant. The infraction system went to a threshold system. Five active points leads to an automated time out. Further infractions, once a poster returns from their time out act with a multiplier effect... lengthening the time out period each time. The system is not retroactive but previous infractions are still on record and are taken into account for how many points get issued per infraction (i.e. how severe/intentional the transgression is).

As I understand it, this system does not auto-generate the 'on time out' or 'banned' messages that used to appear before the system was updated.


----------



## Wild Zero (Feb 22, 2010)

KHayes666 said:


> Catholic Memorial.....will Waltham ever beat them in Super 8?



Oh Super 8, home of the best chant ever.


BC High, BC low...


----------



## collared Princess (Feb 23, 2010)

kayrae said:


> I agree re: confidentiality issues. But all I want to know is that they're banned and that's the reason why they're not posting anymore.



Maybe they stopped posting so they wouldnt get banned


----------



## Weeze (Feb 23, 2010)

I think if i were banned, I'd be forced to get a life and I am NOT DOWN FOR THAT BUSINESS.


----------



## kayrae (Feb 23, 2010)

*PAY ATTENTION:* people were stealth-banned. They didn't stop posting voluntarily. They were banned. I know because I actually hang out with them in real life. 

:goodbye:



collared Princess said:


> Maybe they stopped posting so they wouldnt get banned


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 23, 2010)

krismiss said:


> I think if i were banned, I'd be forced to get a life and I am NOT DOWN FOR THAT BUSINESS.



I just fuckin' Dimensions so much! lol You TELL 'em krismiss!


----------



## Blackjack (Feb 23, 2010)

LillyBBBW said:


> I just fuckin' Dimensions so much!



THIS SENTENCE NO VERB!


----------



## Allie Cat (Feb 23, 2010)

Blackjack said:


> THIS SENTENCE NO VERB!



She accidentally the whole thing.


----------



## CrankySpice (Feb 23, 2010)

kayrae said:


> *PAY ATTENTION:* people were stealth-banned. They didn't stop posting voluntarily. They were banned. I know because I actually hang out with them in real life.
> 
> :goodbye:



So this person (I don't think you actually mean people, it sounds like you are talking about one single person, please do correct me if I am wrong) never, ever had any infractions, any warnings, any indication whatsoever that he/she was perhaps treading on bad territory? The ban police just snuck into his/her bedroom, threw a hood over this person's head, and dragged this person off to ban-land, no previous indications that it was coming?

I find that hard to believe.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 23, 2010)

Blackjack said:


> THIS SENTENCE NO VERB!



Feh. I had an icon in there but it got lost in shipping. Substitute another one. Any one of them will do.


----------



## cinnamitch (Feb 23, 2010)

LillyBBBW said:


> Feh. I had an icon in there but it got lost in shipping. Substitute another one. Any one of them will do.



I like this one


----------



## exile in thighville (Feb 23, 2010)

kayrae said:


> *PAY ATTENTION:* people were stealth-banned. They didn't stop posting voluntarily. They were banned. I know because I actually hang out with them in real life.
> 
> :goodbye:



lol you responded to cp


----------



## OneWickedAngel (Feb 23, 2010)

kayrae said:


> *PAY ATTENTION:* people were stealth-banned. They didn't stop posting voluntarily. They were banned. I know because I actually hang out with them in real life.
> 
> :goodbye:





CrankySpice said:


> So this person (I don't think you actually mean people, it sounds like you are talking about one single person, please do correct me if I am wrong) never, ever had any infractions, any warnings, any indication whatsoever that he/she was perhaps treading on bad territory? The ban police just snuck into his/her bedroom, threw a hood over this person's head, and dragged this person off to ban-land, no previous indications that it was coming?
> 
> I find that hard to believe.



Just curious, how are timed-out/banned dimmers notified of their status?


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 23, 2010)

cinnamitch said:


> I like this one



_"You must spread some Reputation around..."_ bla bla bla.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 23, 2010)

OneWickedAngel said:


> Just curious, how are timed-out/banned dimmers notified of their status?



I think it was mentioned upstream someplace. You get an infraction for your first offense, then another for the second, then another for the third, then another for the fourth and then when you commit your fifth consecutive offense that subsequent infraction will automatically institute a ban or time out via the automatic controls. There's no warning other than the four infractions you got previously warning that you are on thin ice. It is therefore assumed that the person had ample warning in advance, though I don't think there is a form letter that goes out saying "You have been temporarily banned."


----------



## kayrae (Feb 23, 2010)

I said people. I didn't say person. My internet social life is big, like my belly.



CrankySpice said:


> So this person (I don't think you actually mean people, it sounds like you are talking about one single person, please do correct me if I am wrong) never, ever had any infractions, any warnings, any indication whatsoever that he/she was perhaps treading on bad territory? The ban police just snuck into his/her bedroom, threw a hood over this person's head, and dragged this person off to ban-land, no previous indications that it was coming?
> 
> I find that hard to believe.


----------



## OneWickedAngel (Feb 23, 2010)

LillyBBBW said:


> I think it was mentioned upstream someplace. You get an infraction for your first offense, then another for the second, then another for the third, then another for the fourth and then when you commit your fifth consecutive offense that subsequent infraction will automatically institute a ban or time out via the automatic controls. There's no warning other than the four infractions you got previously warning that you are on thin ice. It is therefore assumed that the person had ample warning in advance, though I don't think there is a form letter that goes out saying "You have been temporarily banned."



Thanks Lilly! &#9829;

So, a person doesn't know they've crossed their final line until they can't sign in one day. If it's a time-out how do they know when to return? Just keep signing in everyday until they can? 



kayrae said:


> I said people. I didn't say person. My internet social life is big, like my belly.



Oh can I semi quote you in my sig PLEASE? Don't want to wind up with an infraction for not having your permission!


----------



## kayrae (Feb 23, 2010)

you can always quote me. i like the attention.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 23, 2010)

OneWickedAngel said:


> Thanks Lilly! &#9829;
> 
> So, a person doesn't know they've crossed their final line until they can't sign in one day. If it's a time-out how do they know when to return? Just keep signing in everyday until they can?



I only got one infraction so far. When I can collect all five you'll be the first person I call.  I got banned at [another site that shant be named]. When I tried to log in I got a dialogue box that told me I've been banned for two weeks. Don't know how that works here though.


----------



## CrankySpice (Feb 23, 2010)

kayrae said:


> I said people. I didn't say person. My internet social life is big, like my belly.



Ok, then people - and FTR, you didn't say "internet social life" earlier, you said "real life" which implies face-to-face contact, not just facebook-to-facebook contact.

Still didn't answer my question. Were they bonked over the head with the ban-bat with absolutely no previous infractions/warnings?


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Feb 23, 2010)

CrankySpice said:


> Ok, then people - and FTR, you didn't say "internet social life" earlier, you said "real life" which implies face-to-face contact, not just facebook-to-facebook contact.
> 
> Still didn't answer my question. Were they bonked over the head with the ban-bat with absolutely no previous infractions/warnings?



The only thing I question about the whole infraction thing is how do people know they've been given one? I don't believe that I've ever gotten infracted here and unless I got a pop up message saying it had happened I probably wouldn't know. 

So with that being said, is it possible that someone could have infractions and not know it?


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 23, 2010)

fatgirlflyin said:


> The only thing I question about the whole infraction thing is how do people know they've been given one? I don't believe that I've ever gotten infracted here and unless I got a pop up message saying it had happened I probably wouldn't know.
> 
> So with that being said, is it possible that someone could have infractions and not know it?



NO! If you get an infraction you will know, trust me. You get this new category added to your User CP and an entry that looks like a Rep but it is not. There is a link to the post you made along with a point value for the infraction you got and this sinister personal message left by the Mod that says "Insulted Other Members" or some such thing. There's a red rep can next to it. When you click on the link leading to your post there is a giant red can down in the lower right hand corner of the post marking it as being offensive along with the Mod's comments underneath and the offensive portion removed. Only you can see that red can though, no one else. You can't not know you've been infracted. I was infracted almost two months ago and the points have long since expired but the infraction still sits there sneering menacingly every time I log in. I assume the others will too if I get more.


----------



## Blackjack (Feb 23, 2010)

fatgirlflyin said:


> The only thing I question about the whole infraction thing is how do people know they've been given one? I don't believe that I've ever gotten infracted here and unless I got a pop up message saying it had happened I probably wouldn't know.
> 
> So with that being said, is it possible that someone could have infractions and not know it?



It's not all that easy to miss.

It shows up on your profile...







...and on your User CP:


----------



## KHayes666 (Feb 23, 2010)

Blackjack said:


> It's not all that easy to miss.
> 
> It shows up on your profile...
> 
> ...



Getting an infraction 2 days after Christmas....not very jolly of you. However why do I get the feeling you were in the right with what you said?


----------



## Tina (Feb 23, 2010)

You receive a PM with the infraction. It will state why you were infracted, with a quote of whatever it is that was written that was the cause of the infraction. It will tell you how many infraction points you have and how long those points are active. You can also see it on your own profile, though others cannot see your infraction info.

When a person has reached 5 points -- 5 active points -- the timeout occurs, or whatever action will be taken.

The _only_ people who are ever given an immediate banning here are trolls and spammers. All community members who have been here for a while first get PM warnings before ever even being infracted > then infractions > and then after enough of those, time outs, or bannings, depending.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 23, 2010)

OMGLOLOL! It's in my profile too?? Gees. There goes that shit assed privacy argument down the toilet. lol

ETA: Oops. Spoke too soon. I can't see your infractions on your profile Beej. It's only visible to you. Or at least it WAS only visible to you. It shows up in mine too.


----------



## Jes (Feb 23, 2010)

Tina: i've gotten 2 infractions in my entire Dims life---for one, a Mod sent me a note (and everything you stated above also happened). For the other--no note of any kind. The 2 cases were unrelated, with the 'no note' one happening first.

Either Mods go about this differently OR the software isn't doing what everyone thinks it's set up to do. 

Would people who have been banned out and out lie about receiving notes, PMs, points, whatever? I'm not saying it's impossible, as I'm sure it's very possible. But is that what happened here or did things happen exactly as the members have said they happened, and perhaps the software is to blame? I don't know.


----------



## Blackjack (Feb 23, 2010)

LillyBBBW said:


> OMGLOLOL! It's in my profile too?? Gees. There goes that shit assed privacy argument down the toilet. lol



It doesn't show up for anyone else.


----------



## mossystate (Feb 23, 2010)

Active points meaning those accompanied by red marks? If that is the case, then that's not true. I had not received 5 red infraction points when I got a time out. It is obviously not an automatic thing the system does. 

Now, the oldest infraction that I can see is from back in 2008, and that was a yellow mark. I don't recall any red ones before that.

There are people who I believe in my dark little heart are telling the truth.


----------



## Blackjack (Feb 23, 2010)

mossystate said:


> Active points meaning those accompanied by red marks? If that is the case, then that's not true. I had not received 5 red infraction points when I got a time out. It is obviously not an automatic thing the system does.
> 
> Now, the oldest infraction that I can see is from back in 2008, and that was a yellow mark. I don't recall any red ones before that.
> 
> There are people who I believe in my dark little heart are telling the truth.



It _is _possible to get a timeout without the newer infraction system being used.


----------



## Cat (Feb 23, 2010)

Dang! How do I get me some of them there infractions?


----------



## Saoirse (Feb 23, 2010)

Blackjack said:


> It's not all that easy to miss.
> 
> It shows up on your profile...
> 
> ...




you have 2 infractions? You're such a bad boy! Man, Im wet right now. :smitten:


----------



## Tina (Feb 23, 2010)

Jes said:


> Tina: i've gotten 2 infractions in my entire Dims life---for one, a Mod sent me a note (and everything you stated above also happened). For the other--no note of any kind. The 2 cases were unrelated, with the 'no note' one happening first.
> 
> Either Mods go about this differently OR the software isn't doing what everyone thinks it's set up to do.
> 
> Would people who have been banned out and out lie about receiving notes, PMs, points, whatever? I'm not saying it's impossible, as I'm sure it's very possible. But is that what happened here or did things happen exactly as the members have said they happened, and perhaps the software is to blame? I don't know.





mossystate said:


> Active points meaning those accompanied by red marks? If that is the case, then that's not true. I had not received 5 red infraction points when I got a time out. It is obviously not an automatic thing the system does.
> 
> Now, the oldest infraction that I can see is from back in 2008, and that was a yellow mark. I don't recall any red ones before that.
> 
> There are people who I believe in my dark little heart are telling the truth.



I would like to say that things are always consistent, but they are not. The 5 point thing is newer; above and beyond, things can obviously be left to the discretion of Conrad or other mods. The motto is usually "less is more" when it comes to moderating. Personally, I'm in favor of that, with the exception of needing to be more protective of protected spaces, like the BBW board, where less is still more, but have stricter guidelines.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 23, 2010)

Jes said:


> Tina: i've gotten 2 infractions in my entire Dims life---for one, a Mod sent me a note (and everything you stated above also happened). For the other--no note of any kind. The 2 cases were unrelated, with the 'no note' one happening first.
> 
> Either Mods go about this differently OR the software isn't doing what everyone thinks it's set up to do.
> 
> Would people who have been banned out and out lie about receiving notes, PMs, points, whatever? I'm not saying it's impossible, as I'm sure it's very possible. But is that what happened here or did things happen exactly as the members have said they happened, and perhaps the software is to blame? I don't know.



I don't remember if I got a note for that infraction. I had so much bad press from that post I could have gotten one and just not remembered it among all the other beatings I took over that post. Even without it, I can't see someone getting four throbbing red infractions and not knowing. Possibly their inability to get in to the boards doesn't allow them to see what post the fifth and final infraction was for? Still, there is nothing compelling enough that moves me to view the banned as poor innocent victims here. Like I said before, it creates confusion when you don't know that the person you're waiting for a response from can't respond and that's all I'm really whining about.


----------



## Tina (Feb 23, 2010)

Ms. Lilly, infractions always come with some kind of note (eta: not note, but notice; the note is optional). They are automatically generated by the system -- well the notice and quote of the 'offending' post are. It's then up to us to give whatever explanation for the infraction in the note field. I think most of us do that; I know I do, without fail.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 23, 2010)

Tina said:


> Ms. Lilly, infractions always come with some kind of note (eta: not note, but notice; the note is optional). They are automatically generated by the system -- well the notice and quote of the 'offending' post are. It's then up to us to give whatever explanation for the infraction in the note field. I think most of us do that; I know I do, without fail.



By note I meant PM Tina. Surely I got a note right there in my User CP, not to mention the post in question. I just don't recall if I got a PM. I may have, probably did, but it doesn't stand out in my memory is all.


----------



## Tina (Feb 23, 2010)

Ah, okay. Often a warning note by PM will come before an infraction, but not always, and it differs by moderator, I'd say.


----------



## Weeze (Feb 23, 2010)

Well, now we know what kinds of threads BEEJ likes to subscribe to.


----------



## tonynyc (Feb 23, 2010)

So I guess infractions can be seen as a sort of "Negative Rep"


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 23, 2010)

tonynyc said:


> So I guess infractions can be seen as a sort of "Negative Rep"



You could say that. Instead of rep cans, you get rep bans.


----------



## kayrae (Feb 23, 2010)

internet social life = people i've met in real life. I just happened to meet them from the internet first.



CrankySpice said:


> Ok, then people - and FTR, you didn't say "internet social life" earlier, you said "real life" which implies face-to-face contact, not just facebook-to-facebook contact.
> 
> Still didn't answer my question. Were they bonked over the head with the ban-bat with absolutely no previous infractions/warnings?


----------



## Blackjack (Feb 23, 2010)

krismiss said:


> Well, now we know what kinds of threads BEEJ likes to subscribe to.



Are you at all surprised?


----------



## Weeze (Feb 23, 2010)

Blackjack said:


> Are you at all surprised?



Well.... Ok, no, not really.


----------



## Paquito (Feb 23, 2010)

Alright kids, I have two more infractions until I'm on thin ice. Any suggestions? I want them to be big, the stuff of Dims legend.


----------



## tonynyc (Feb 23, 2010)

free2beme04 said:


> Alright kids, I have two more infractions until I'm on thin ice. Any suggestions? I want them to be big, the stuff of Dims legend.



*S*tart some shit at Hyde Park


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 23, 2010)

free2beme04 said:


> Alright kids, I have two more infractions until I'm on thin ice. Any suggestions? I want them to be big, the stuff of Dims legend.



Oooooh, how I would love to make you my own personal sock puppet of doom! You would be banned, I would remain here smelling like a rose.


----------



## tonynyc (Feb 23, 2010)

Dims Death Squads


----------



## CrankySpice (Feb 23, 2010)

kayrae said:


> internet social life = people i've met in real life. I just happened to meet them from the internet first.



And...these multitudes of real life friends of yours who were banned...had they ever gotten an infraction? a time out? a PM warning? Or did the ban fall off a space station and whack them in the head as they walked down the street, completely unaware of the impending doom?


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Feb 23, 2010)

Why didn't anyone ask me? I have had a ton of infractions and banning. I know the deal by heart.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 23, 2010)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> Why didn't anyone ask me? I have had a ton of infractions and banning. I know the deal by heart.



That's right folks. Sandie aint scared of NOBODY! 'ats why I love her. :bow::smitten::bow:


----------



## kayrae (Feb 23, 2010)

why yes, sherlock, some of them never got an infraction or a time out or a PM warning. 



CrankySpice said:


> And...these multitudes of real life friends of yours who were banned...had they ever gotten an infraction? a time out? a PM warning? Or did the ban fall off a space station and whack them in the head as they walked down the street, completely unaware of the impending doom?


----------



## CrankySpice (Feb 23, 2010)

kayrae said:


> why yes, sherlock, some of them never got an infraction or a time out or a PM warning.



REally? How interesting. Care to reveal the names of these people, so a mod can check it out and confirm? 

Because surely it was in error, if they never, ever got a single infraction, time out, or warning. And since it's bothered you so very much to bring it up in thread, I know you'd probably like nothing more than to clear their names and get their dims privileges reinstated, since they were so unfairly and unjustly banned just...for...being.

All these great multitudes of close personal friends who got put on the ban-wagon. Can't wait to welcome them all back!


----------



## kayrae (Feb 23, 2010)

why do you think this thread got started? perhaps my friends can speak up for themselves... oh wait, they were banned


----------



## Weeze (Feb 23, 2010)

CrankySpice said:


> REally? How interesting. Care to reveal the names of these people, so a mod can check it out and confirm?
> 
> Because surely it was in error, if they never, ever got a single infraction, time out, or warning. And since it's bothered you so very much to bring it up in thread, I know you'd probably like nothing more than to clear their names and get their dims privileges reinstated, since they were so unfairly and unjustly banned just...for...being.
> 
> All these great multitudes of close personal friends who got put on the ban-wagon. Can't wait to welcome them all back!



I realize you and Kayrae are having good clean fun, but I just figured i'd let you know that she's, uh, right. There WERE stealth-bannings (not saying they weren't warranted, I don't know reasons) so you should probably quit now.


----------



## CrankySpice (Feb 23, 2010)

kayrae said:


> why do you think this thread got started? perhaps my friends can speak up for themselves... oh wait, they were banned



Oh, I see. So when you said the below:



kayrae said:


> I do think it's our business to know who is banned here.



What you meant was "It's MY business to know" but the rest of us can go to hell if we ask about it.

Got it.


----------



## kayrae (Feb 23, 2010)

Reading Comprehension 101:



kayrae said:


> You don't need to tell me WHY they're banned, but I most certainly want to know that it happened. Why was it OK to have "banned" under someone's username before but now it's not?



If you're going to quote me, do it right.


----------



## CrankySpice (Feb 23, 2010)

krismiss said:


> I realize you and Kayrae are having good clean fun, but I just figured i'd let you know that she's, uh, right. There WERE stealth-bannings (*not saying they weren't warranted*, I don't know reasons) so you should probably quit now.



That is *my* point, however. That whether or not they were banned without ANYONE ELSE on the board knowing why, the people who were banned know quite very well why they were banned and more than likely not only saw the ban coming, but looked forward to it as a badge of honor.

Meaning that the fear-mongering going on in this thread, making people who have no reason whatsoever to fear or even vaguely wonder if they are going to banned, is completely and utterly pointless and, furthermore, mean and sadistic and cruel. 

NO ONE has been banned without reason. NO ONE has been banned without some kind of warning being issued beforehand. If they claim otherwise, they are straight out lying.


----------



## CrankySpice (Feb 23, 2010)

kayrae said:


> Reading Comprehension 101:
> 
> 
> 
> If you're going to quote me, do it right.



Really? Because I thought that:



OneWickedAngel said:


> Oh can I *semi quote *you in my sig PLEASE? Don't want to wind up with an infraction for not having your permission!





kayrae said:


> you can always quote me. i like the attention.


----------



## kayrae (Feb 23, 2010)

Journalism 101: Question everything. Only suckers believe what they're told.


----------



## kayrae (Feb 23, 2010)

Are you OneWickedAngel?



CrankySpice said:


> Really? Because I thought that:


----------



## CrankySpice (Feb 23, 2010)

kayrae said:


> Journalism 101: Question everything. Only suckers believe what they're told.



Could not agree more. Which is why I'd love for a mod to confirm your claim that your friends were banned for no reason and with absolutely no warning at all.


----------



## kayrae (Feb 23, 2010)

I walked right into that one :bow:


----------



## Shosh (Feb 23, 2010)

I have two infractions, I got one of the lil red ones, and one of the new little yellow suckas!

I hope I do not get an infraction for discussing my infractions.

Oh yeah and I was banned once for 24 hours.


----------



## jenboo (Feb 23, 2010)

LillyBBBW said:


> I only got one infraction so far. When I can collect all five you'll be the first person I call.  I got banned at [another site that shant be named]. When I tried to log in I got a dialogue box that told me I've been banned for two weeks. Don't know how that works here though.



I got banned at eharmony and they did not tell me. I just could not post of the boards and then eventually I could not even sign in...heehee


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 23, 2010)

Divals said:


> I gots me a question about infractions.
> 
> I don't think I've ever had one. How would I find out if I had?





Blackjack said:


> It'll show up on your User CP below your subscribed threads and above your rep.



Actually, you will receive a PM infraction notice - as well as it showing in your profile. The comment in the profile can only be seen by you and the mods.


----------



## jenboo (Feb 23, 2010)

CrankySpice said:


> Really? Because I thought that:



Crankyspice are you a moderator too?


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Feb 23, 2010)

LillyBBBW said:


> That's right folks. Sandie aint scared of NOBODY! 'ats why I love her. :bow::smitten::bow:



you know that's true - online and off.

I will say I have been personally banned from the the old website by Conrad - I think it was for life. It was my proudest moment. (joking)

:bow::bow::bow:


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 23, 2010)

OneWickedAngel said:


> Thanks Lilly! &#9829;
> 
> So, a person doesn't know they've crossed their final line until they can't sign in one day. If it's a time-out how do they know when to return? Just keep signing in everyday until they can?
> 
> ...



Actually no, Lilly is incorrect. 

As James mentioned, the infractions are handled on a points system. It not the number of infractions that get you a time out (per se) it is the number of points you receive that get you a time out. 

Kind of like your driver's license. You receive points for violations or infractions, and when you reach 5 you are automatically timed out for a period of time, until your points expire. If you look at your profile (when you have been infracted), it tells you when the points expire so you should be able to see when you will allowed to post again. 

Hope that clears up the confusion.


----------



## CrankySpice (Feb 23, 2010)

jenboo said:


> Crankyspice are you a moderator too?



No, Ma'am (or Miss, or Ms., whichever your preference is) I am not.

You can see the full list of moderators (and which boards they moderate) right here:

http://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/forums/showgroups.php


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 23, 2010)

fatgirlflyin said:


> The only thing I question about the whole infraction thing is how do people know they've been given one? I don't believe that I've ever gotten infracted here and unless I got a pop up message saying it had happened I probably wouldn't know.
> 
> So with that being said, is it possible that someone could have infractions and not know it?



No, it is not possible to have an infraction and not know it. 

If you receive and infraction, you will get a PM infraction notice with specific information on what you did wrong, how it is being handled, and the number of points you are receiving for said infraction. 

Infractions will also show in your profile. (Only you and the mods can see them). 

If you receive an infraction - it will be obvious, and quite clear. 

Which is why we do not buy into the b.s. that some spout about having "no idea why I was banned" and "no one ever warned me", etc. That is just not true.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Feb 23, 2010)

Sandie is correct people. When I have gotten infractions or been banned I always knew exactly why. I got a PM and it was in my profile. So I also do not believe people who say they had no idea. It's quite clear from the very start. 





Sandie S-R said:


> No, it is not possible to have an infraction and not know it.
> 
> If you receive and infraction, you will get a PM infraction notice with specific information on what you did wrong, how it is being handled, and the number of points you are receiving for said infraction.
> 
> ...


----------



## mossystate (Feb 23, 2010)

I received a time out when I had 2 points. One of those two points for the actual thing that was given as the reason for the time out.


----------



## CrankySpice (Feb 23, 2010)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> Sandie is correct people. When I have gotten infractions or been banned I always knew exactly why. I got a PM and it was in my profile. So I also do not believe people who say they had no idea. It's quite clear from the very start.



Can I just say that I love the fact that when I first started reading this post, I thought you were talking about yourself in the third person? When I realized I was wrong, it totally cracked me up.

Yes, the Cranky lol'd!


----------



## SoVerySoft (Feb 23, 2010)

Mods follow the rules and try to be consistent. Conrad can do what he chooses to do, and that might sometimes mean a person will be banned if he thinks it's appropriate.

I don't remember if that was your situation, Mossy, but I want people to know that it's not only the Mods making decisions here.

Also, getting 5 active infraction points is not the only reason someone might get a time out or be banned.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Feb 23, 2010)

CrankySpice said:


> Can I just say that I love the fact that when I first started reading this post, I thought you were talking about yourself in the third person? When I realized I was wrong, it totally cracked me up.
> 
> Yes, the Cranky lol'd!



LOL - that is funny.


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 23, 2010)

free2beme04 said:


> Alright kids, I have two more infractions until I'm on thin ice. Any suggestions? I want them to be big, the stuff of Dims legend.



Again, it is not the number of infractions - but the number of points. 

The points you got for previous infractions have expired, so right now you have a clean slate. It could take 5 infractions of one point each to get you a time out - or one giant fuck-up infraction that gets you 5 points and you'll receive an instant time out.

Your choice.


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 23, 2010)

kayrae said:


> why yes, sherlock, some of them never got an infraction or a time out or a PM warning.



That may be what they are telling you Kayrae - but it ain't so. 

I guarantee it.

Unless someone is a newbie troll or spammer (who can get bounced right outta here for a single post), active members get a lot of chances before they are ever banned here. 

That is a fact.


----------



## rainyday (Feb 23, 2010)

Go for the 5-pointer, Free! Be a hero.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Feb 23, 2010)

free2beme04 said:


> Alright kids, I have two more infractions until I'm on thin ice. Any suggestions? I want them to be big, the stuff of Dims legend.



I got a few:

Call one of the Mods an asshole.

Use the *f* word in your reply to the Mod who wants to give you an infraction.

Tell someone you are arguing with here to *f*ck off* in the thread you are arguing in.


Disclaimer - this post is for entertainment purposes only. I am not suggesting ANYONE do any of the things listed above. Really this was just a joke. :bow:


----------



## jenboo (Feb 23, 2010)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> Sandie is correct people. When I have gotten infractions or been banned I always knew exactly why. I got a PM and it was in my profile. So I also do not believe people who say they had no idea. It's quite clear from the very start.



Sandie, if you have been banned how are you here?


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Feb 23, 2010)

Sandie S-R said:


> Again, it is not the number of infractions - but the number of points.
> 
> The points you got for previous infractions have expired, so right now you have a clean slate. It could take 5 infractions of one point each to get you a time out - or one giant fuck-up infraction that gets you 5 points and you'll receive an instant time out.
> 
> Your choice.



Ok so question. Who decides how many point an infraction is worth. Is there a scale that says this action equals this many points? Or is it up to the Mod issuing the infraction?


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Feb 23, 2010)

jenboo said:


> Sandie, if you have been banned how are you here?



Being banned for however long is decided by the Mods. I think the time banned is different for everyone.

As for the ban for life. I apologized to Conrad. He let me come back.


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 23, 2010)

mossystate said:


> I received a time out when I had 2 points. One of those two points for the actual thing that was given as the reason for the time out.




Mossy, the timeout that you refer to, was prior to the newer system being implemented. 

Now things are happening as explained, and based on 5 points being the automatic time out threshold.


----------



## jenboo (Feb 23, 2010)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> Being banned for however long is decided by the Mods. I think the time banned is different for everyone.
> 
> As for the ban for life. I apologized to Conrad. He let me come back.



gotcha....


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 23, 2010)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> I got a few:
> 
> Call one of the Mods an asshole.
> 
> ...




lol

Indeed, Sandie you have used these all, and maybe even a few others you didn't mention.


----------



## Saoirse (Feb 23, 2010)

Sandie S-R said:


> Actually, you will receive a PM infraction notice - as well as it showing in your profile. The comment in the profile can only be seen by you and the mods.




I got an infraction from the Chief and I dont remember an PM about it. Not that I care, just sayin.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Feb 23, 2010)

Sandie S-R said:


> lol
> 
> Indeed, Sandie you have used these all, and maybe even a few others you didn't mention.



Oh I'm sure I have. I think I'm mellowing - I don't want to fight so much anymore


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 23, 2010)

fatgirlflyin said:


> Ok so question. Who decides how many point an infraction is worth. Is there a scale that says this action equals this many points? Or is it up to the Mod issuing the infraction?



There are automatic points for most things - or we can assign points based on the severity of the infraction (moderators discretion). 

If you have a ton of infractions and just keep repeating the same rules violation I am likely going to issue more points against you rather than just a single automatic point.


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 23, 2010)

Saoirse said:


> I got an infraction from the Chief and I dont remember an PM about it. Not that I care, just sayin.



It's possible that Conrad gave you a time out - without issuing an infraction. He can do that, because, well, he's the Chief. 

However if an infraction is actually issued to you, there is an automated system that generates a PM notice to you of that infraction, so even if Conrad issues an infraction you should still get a PM notice.


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 23, 2010)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> Oh I'm sure I have. I think I'm mellowing - I don't want to fight so much anymore



That happens to all of us as we get older (for the most part).


----------



## Saoirse (Feb 23, 2010)

Sandie S-R said:


> It's possible that Conrad gave you a time out - without issuing an infraction. He can do that, because, well, he's the Chief.
> 
> However if an infraction is actually issued to you, there is an automated system that generates a PM notice to you of that infraction, so even if Conrad issues an infraction you should still get a PM notice.



No time-out, just an infraction notice in my User CP. Its totes possible that I got a PM and just do not remember, but its not ringing any bells.

Oh well, it was a while ago! and wouldnt you know it, I just cleaned out my inbox last night, so I cant go back and check! haha


----------



## SoVerySoft (Feb 23, 2010)

I think that if the Mod (or Conrad) puts any text in the "message" field, it would then issue a PM. But there are times when we let the description of the offense serve as the explanation.


----------



## kayrae (Feb 23, 2010)

there's a special ed group?!?! and a super moderator group even? omg, what do each of these group mean?



CrankySpice said:


> No, Ma'am (or Miss, or Ms., whichever your preference is) I am not.
> 
> You can see the full list of moderators (and which boards they moderate) right here:
> 
> http://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/forums/showgroups.php


----------



## Angel (Feb 23, 2010)

kayrae said:


> there's a special ed group?!?! and a super moderator group even? omg, what do each of these group mean?



It's a secret society and only those who were initiated into the groups know what the group means. And they are sworn to secrecy. If they tell.... we'll never hear from them again


----------



## Angel (Feb 23, 2010)

kayrae,

Your friends could be telling you the truth. They may have created a board name and that name gotten banned without warning.















Your friends may have failed to tell you that they had a previous forum identity, caused a lot of problems while using the previous identity, and were banned while using that identity. Your friends may have failed to tell you that they're not as innocent as you believe them to be; and that the identity you know them by wasn't their first here.



I don't know who your friends are or what their identity was here. Just a word of advice. If you really want to help them get reinstated, try handling things in a professional manner by writing privately to the webmaster or to the forum mods. Stirring up things and making accusations on the open forum without knowing all the details won't help your friends at all. Obviously you don't know all the details. Someone hasn't given you the whole story; and the mods don't have to explain anything to do with the bannings to you because you were not the one banned.


----------



## Weeze (Feb 23, 2010)

HEY KIDS.

Let's play the Let's-See-How-Passive-Agressive-We-Can-Be Game!


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 23, 2010)

kayrae said:


> there's a special ed group?!?! and a super moderator group even? omg, what do each of these group mean?



Kayrae - 

If that were important information for everyone to have it would be clearly stated somewhere - or we would be sure to see that you had that information. 

It's info for moderator benefit. Not poster benefit. So it is really of no value to you.


----------



## Wagimawr (Feb 23, 2010)

I don't know, when I had the Paysite Board and Weight Board taken away (i.e. they suddenly disappeared) for a month, the only thing even remotely resembling a warning that I got was the removal of one of my posts both times I tried to post it.

CRANKYSPICE DID YOU READ THIS? It's not exactly a ban, but still.


----------



## tonynyc (Feb 23, 2010)

*Well... the only other alternative is to join the "Mod Squad" and become privy to all sorts of fun stuff...*


----------



## Mathias (Feb 23, 2010)

krismiss said:


> HEY KIDS.
> 
> Let's play the Let's-See-How-Passive-Agressive-We-Can-Be Game!



I'll just sit back and watch, thanks!


----------



## kayrae (Feb 23, 2010)

mathias, that's not how sitting back and watching works


----------



## CrankySpice (Feb 23, 2010)

Wagimawr said:


> I don't know, when I had the Paysite Board and Weight Board taken away (i.e. they suddenly disappeared) for a month, the only thing even remotely resembling a warning that I got was the removal of one of my posts both times I tried to post it.
> 
> CRANKYSPICE DID YOU READ THIS? It's not exactly a ban, but still.



Whew, thank goodness for the caps, I might have missed it otherwise!

I'm curious - were you surprised by your mini-time out? Like, genuinely? Or had you made a post that you kinda-sorta knew was on the line and might result in an infraction/ban/what-have-you? Had you had any infractions prior to that?

Also curious (if you don't mind answering, if so - totally understand) when was this? Was it at a time when the system was changing, or was a recently, or quite a bit prior to the change? Was an explanation ever given to you regarding the mini-time out, or did it just appear and disappear without you ever knowing the reasons why?

And no, I'm not screwing with you (well, except for the caps part) - I'm asking sincerely because I wonder. If you prefer not to answer, I totally respect that decision since, frankly, it's none of my business. I'm just being nosy.


----------



## stan_der_man (Feb 23, 2010)

tonynyc said:


> *Well... the only other alternative is to join the "Mod Squad" and become privy to all sorts of fun stuff...*



Every time I see this thread title I keep thinking "mod/band questions", like people are asking about The Who or The Jam... 

Just for the record, and keeping on topic.... My personal experience has been that the mods here have been very fair to me IMO, I do make an effort to follow the rules and keep things positive. But there have been many occasions when my posts (or once an entire thread) just go *poof* and are deleted without warning. Some of those posts I could somewhat understand why they were deleted, but others I personally don't believe violated rules, although they may have come close. Sandie once sent me a PM, and Risible once explained why a thread of mine was locked... But other than that, over the years, I've had maybe a dozen or so posts deleted and didn't know they were deleted until some time later when I randomly check for responses to posts I make.


----------



## Wild Zero (Feb 23, 2010)

stan_der_man said:


> Every time I see this thread title I keep thinking "mod/band questions", like people are asking about The Who or The Jam...



Would the moderators be The Style Council?


----------



## stan_der_man (Feb 23, 2010)

Wild Zero said:


> Would the moderators be The Style Council?



Actually, more like the Untouchables...


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 23, 2010)

Wagimawr said:


> I don't know, when I had the Paysite Board and Weight Board taken away (i.e. they suddenly disappeared) for a month, the only thing even remotely resembling a warning that I got was the removal of one of my posts both times I tried to post it.
> 
> CRANKYSPICE DID YOU READ THIS? It's not exactly a ban, but still.




People can lose their ability to post here or in certain forums if the Webmaster feels they are abusing their posting privileges. 

As has been stated, Conrad can handle things however he sees fit. And it doesn't always require him sending you a warning or Pm first. 

For the most part however, here we are discussing how we moderators are supposed to handle things. And we moderators have a process that we follow in dealing with warnings, infractions and bans.


----------



## Wagimawr (Feb 23, 2010)

CrankySpice said:


> I'm asking sincerely because I wonder. If you prefer not to answer, I totally respect that decision since, frankly, it's none of my business. I'm just being nosy.





Sandie S-R said:


> As has been stated, Conrad can handle things however he sees fit. And it doesn't always require him sending you a warning or Pm first.


Crankyspice, this pretty much explains that. I got censored by Conrad, not a moderator, clearly.


----------



## tonynyc (Feb 23, 2010)

stan_der_man said:


> Every time I see this thread title I keep thinking "mod/band questions", like people are asking about The Who or The Jam...
> 
> Just for the record, and keeping on topic.... My personal experience has been that the mods here have been very fair to me IMO, I do make an effort to follow the rules and keep things positive. But there have been many occasions when my posts (or once an entire thread) just go *poof* and are deleted without warning. Some of those posts I could somewhat understand why they were deleted, but others I personally don't believe violated rules, although they may have come close. Sandie once sent me a PM, and Risible once explained why a thread of mine was locked... But other than that, over the years, I've had maybe a dozen or so posts deleted and didn't know they were deleted until some time later when I randomly check for responses to posts I make.



*W*ell Stan , how about this scenario...

I wonder if Mods can be banned - kind of like "Cop gone bad" 

Now, if Dimmers can give "Mods" infractions that would lead to "Citizen's Arrest"


----------



## supersoup (Feb 23, 2010)

i guess i just don't understand something here. i totally get that people are upset and whatnot when friends get banned or censored or blocked...but if you dislike a place so much, that is run by the person that owns it, how he sees it fit, then why not just go somewhere else? i left a music board i was on because of that very reason...it changed, i hated the changes, had good friends i made there, but i left. i was done. many people stayed and tried fighting the good fight, and again, let me state that i totally respect that, both here and in my own case, but it's pretty much a standstill deal. this is conrad's board, he has stated it's purpose, his views, how he wants it run, etc. i have no choice but to respect it, and if the day ever comes where i no longer like it or agree, i'm out. i've made lifelong friends here, but it's a bookmark on the internet, and i'd delete it if it became toxic to me. i just don't understand why you dislike this board and the people that DO like it so much that you'd want to stay around and make it a mass of arguments and inane bullshit. it feels like there's a mass of people throwing flaming bags of dog doo at my house's door. i hate it, and i wish i could make both sides happy. 

bah.


----------



## CleverBomb (Feb 24, 2010)

stan_der_man said:


> Every time I see this thread title I keep thinking "mod/band questions", like people are asking about The Who or The Jam...
> 
> Just for the record, and keeping on topic....





Wild Zero said:


> Would the moderators be The Style Council?



That's just Madness! 

-Rusty
'74 Vespa 150 Super
'09 Vespa LX150S
Combat boots and a parka.
(oh, wait -- nevermind. We return you to your previously scheduled discussion already in progress.)


----------



## LoveBHMS (Feb 24, 2010)

supersoup said:


> i just don't understand why you dislike this board and the people that DO like it so much that you'd want to stay around and make it a mass of arguments and inane bullshit.



Because too many people confuse "Dimensions" with "the entire Size Acceptance movement". And waaaaay too many people are into this whole "storming the gates" mentality and thinking that this board needs to be revamped to accomodate them merely because they're fat. This needs to be created to fit *my needs* and that needs to be removed because *I don't like it* and this other policy is wrong and I don't like it. 

This board does not belong to all of us and it does not belong to the community whether or not you give money. It's Conrad's board and we're here or not here as he chooses. Deal.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 24, 2010)

supersoup said:


> i guess i just don't understand something here. i totally get that people are upset and whatnot when friends get banned or censored or blocked...but if you dislike a place so much, that is run by the person that owns it, how he sees it fit, then why not just go somewhere else? i left a music board i was on because of that very reason...it changed, i hated the changes, had good friends i made there, but i left. i was done. many people stayed and tried fighting the good fight, and again, let me state that i totally respect that, both here and in my own case, but it's pretty much a standstill deal. this is conrad's board, he has stated it's purpose, his views, how he wants it run, etc. i have no choice but to respect it, and if the day ever comes where i no longer like it or agree, i'm out. i've made lifelong friends here, but it's a bookmark on the internet, and i'd delete it if it became toxic to me. i just don't understand why you dislike this board and the people that DO like it so much that you'd want to stay around and make it a mass of arguments and inane bullshit. it feels like there's a mass of people throwing flaming bags of dog doo at my house's door. i hate it, and i wish i could make both sides happy.
> 
> bah.



Yeah, I have had my Mod issues and have strongly spoken up about it from time to time. Certain policies make me feel limited here but not enough to impede my enjoyment of the rest of the joint, that's why I stay. I don't go around complaining about it all the time though, and I don't keep poking people in the back with passive aggressive commentary. Not saying I'm beyond that kind of thing, just that I'm too easily distracted to keep at it for long. I will say though that I've gotten used to reading posts that contain some kind of disgruntled epithet in reference to a long held grievance about an unpopular policy here. 

Back in the early days of this forum there were several people who got banned permanently for doing this all over the place. People pleaded repeatedly on a daily basis for this one particular person to be removed and after months and months of long suffering he finally was. Everyone felt pretty smug that justice was finally served though from time to time I'm still in contact with this guy and to this day he STILL can't understand why he was banned. He uses the same language that many people use here now to describe the injustices and favoritism that were used against him in getting banned. It seems a familiar song when someone is banned. None of them seem to understand why they were cut off and in turn nobody seems to give a shit what they think, everybody's just glad he's not here to keep raising cane. 

The evil in me has tempted me to use cryptic language to talk about this poor hapless and misunderstood person wrongly targeted for speaking his mind, just for fun to see what happens. I might drum up some curiosity for a minute or so but it would quickly die a violent death were I to mention his name. People would know immediately who he is, why he was banned and my credibility would be deeper in the shitter than it already is on some levels. I have a tendency to be very skeptical when someone talks about friends of theirs who were wrongly targeted while conveniently omitting who they are for privacy reasons. Innocent victims don't tend to exist here, no matter how vehemently the so called victim claims otherwise. Most everybody except those closest to them would be able to pick out exactly why this person was put on time out. A lot of these people are folks I like very much but come on... if you're going to snap your towel, (wo)man up and sit in the penalty box when your turn comes. And don't eat all the cookies in there either, I hear they're yummy.


----------



## Jes (Feb 24, 2010)

Sandie S-R said:


> Actually, you will receive a PM infraction notice - as well as it showing in your profile. The comment in the profile can only be seen by you and the mods.



i didn't get one, as i said up thread. i have no reason to lie about it. i just happened to check my CP one day and saw a new little box that had a 1-point rating, with a short blurb about... offending another member or something. Doing something negative to another member. No PM.

Having dealt with 3 mods now, in various ways (2 infractions, 1 post removed), I can say that only 1 time did I receive a PM with any information.

I think tina is right when she says mods handle things differently. I think it's ok to say that. it doesn't sound like the Dims members like that, but that's not atypical. Mods handle things differently.


----------



## Blackjack (Feb 24, 2010)

CleverBomb said:


> That's just Madness!









(Sorry, habit)


----------



## Jes (Feb 24, 2010)

SoVerySoft said:


> I think that if the Mod (or Conrad) puts any text in the "message" field, it would then issue a PM. But there are times when we let the description of the offense serve as the explanation.



right. So that's a difference from what we're being told by others. I'm not questioning the system as I don't so much care, but I think a unified front, in terms of how the system is being explained, would go far, here. 

Also, when was the change implemented? My infractions both happened the week of Xmas, I think. Again, I got 1 explicative PM, not 2. Is it possible that the system changed between the 2 infractions I got? Or is the issue what you describe above--differing styles?


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Feb 24, 2010)

You talkin bout Vince? lol


----------



## LillyBBBW (Feb 24, 2010)

BeautifulPoeticDisaster said:


> You talkin bout Vince? lol



*squeeeee* Somebody guessed it!


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Feb 24, 2010)

LillyBBBW said:


> *squeeeee* Somebody guessed it!



See, I pay attention, lol...and goes to show you how long I've been paying attention. I just like to blend into the scenery and take notice of everything around me


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Feb 24, 2010)

BeautifulPoeticDisaster said:


> You talkin bout Vince? lol



Aka "he who shall not be named", aka Trolldemort, Vince of Darkness, etc. His legend has only grown since he was banished in his antagonistic prime. :bow:


----------



## Webmaster (Feb 24, 2010)

Hi [person who took the time to PM me with a concern],

Thanks for your thoughtful note. I really appreciate it when people approach me directly with opinions, analysis and suggestions as opposed to placing them in some thread that I might never see.

I mostly agree with your assessment of the most recent campaign to change Dimensions' mission into a different direction, and also about the negative impact a small minority who does not get their way can have on a community.

As for bans from the Dimensions site, unless you're a spammer or troll, it takes a lot to permanently lose posting privileges. For most cases we have a fairly well publicized infraction system that assigns points for transgressions that then accumulate and result in time-outs much like insurance companies or traffic courts view drivers license points. Every once in a while we run into someone who is grossly abusing their posting privileges here and does not respond to any infractions or warnings. Recently, two such posters have found that they are no longer welcome in our community.

Why did we not make a public trial, engage in debate and arguments, and mark them as "banned"? Because that is exactly what they were looking for. It would have served to get them what they wanted, to be seen as martyrs. 

Sure, I know that having been denied that opportunity, those involved and their supporters then simply start a campaign accusing Dimensions of a "policy of stealth bans" and such. Frankly, folks influenced by such rumor and drama starters probably did not have much interest in a site where Big is Beautiful. We are NOT in the business of courting fence-sitters or win popularity contests; we simply try to run the best possible website for FAs and the fat people they admire, nothing more and nothing less. 

That doesn't mean I am dismissing your well-presented arguments in favor of public bannings. Those have happened and they may happen again, it's just that, like any organization, we need to negotiate issues and problems with as little collateral damage as possible, and as we all know, some collateral damage will always happen, no matter how hard we try.

Overall, I do believe that longevity and staying one's course are key. Websites come and go, but I want for Dimensions to always be there, and that means that I always try to keep the big picture in mind rather than resorting to knee-jerk reactions and duking it out in the trenches. 

There's also another weird dynamic that I never quite managed to understand: People love drama. We buy the National Enquirer and similar sensationalist rags, we go to races secretly hoping to see accidents, etc., etc. Some folks seem to live for the drama and lose interest as soon as things go smoothly.

So, again, thank you for your thoughts. They made me think and contemplate, and this is always a good thing.


----------



## Tina (Feb 24, 2010)

LillyBBBW said:


> The evil in me has tempted me to use cryptic language to talk about this poor hapless and misunderstood person wrongly targeted for speaking his mind, just for fun to see what happens.


Not hard to figure out who that is, for those of us who have been around long enough to remember -- and to have even fought with him... 

And yet, there are times I miss him -- but only the side of him who could be thoughtful, eloquent and witty. And highly intelligent. But he was never able to maintain that for long and had to say something that would rile people up and start drama, and then seem to enjoy watching it unfold all the while claiming innocence and cluelessness as to why what he said was a problem (and too often what he said was an blanket insult to various kinds of fat women). I'm not sure Conrad ever gave a person so many chances. Perhaps too many. Were he to show up today and be the side of himself that I enjoy I'd like having him here. And then a week or two down the road, when he's saying the things he does that reliably will cause problems, I'll just want to kick his ass. So all in all, it's better that the hapless prawn is no longer posting here.


----------



## Shosh (Feb 24, 2010)

Tina said:


> Not hard to figure out who that is, for those of us who have been around long enough to remember -- and to have even fought with him...
> 
> And yet, there are times I miss him -- but only the side of him who could be thoughtful, eloquent and witty. And highly intelligent. But he was never able to maintain that for long and had to say something that would rile people up and start drama, and then seem to enjoy watching it unfold all the while claiming innocence and cluelessness as to why what he said was a problem (and too often what he said was an blanket insult to various kinds of fat women). I'm not sure Conrad ever gave a person so many chances. Perhaps too many. Were he to show up today and be the side of himself that I enjoy I'd like having him here. And then a week or two down the road, when he's saying the things he does that reliably will cause problems, I'll just want to kick his ass. So all in all, it's better that the hapless prawn is no longer posting here.



Even though he lives in Australia, he is still Canadian technically. So he is a Canuck not a prawn. Or is he American? My memory is failing me.


----------



## Tina (Feb 24, 2010)

No, he's a Canadian living in Austrailia, Shosh. But the Hapless Prawn thing is kind of an in-joke from back then. Wish I still had the graphic that Greenie made. Wonder what happened to her; I liked her a lot.

Anyway, sorry to bring things off topic... As you were.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Feb 24, 2010)

Shosh said:


> Even though he lives in Australia, he is still Canadian technically. So he is a Canuck not a prawn. Or is he American? My memory is failing me.



Wasn't his handle *Oz* Vince though? C'mon Shosh, us Yanks are still saddled with Mini. Take your lumps as they're earned.


----------



## Sandie S-R (Feb 24, 2010)

LillyBBBW said:


> *squeeeee* Somebody guessed it!



Lilly, you used the word "hapless". Dead giveaway.


----------

