Poll: Do Certain Members Need to Go?

[Chase]

Hey fellas,

We've had a number of complaints lately that several members are having a negative effect on the boards. And I've had a few users tell me directly they think we're being too soft on some of these members. That these members are causing a lot of division, bad feelings, and driving good guys who want to learn and grow away.

So let me ask the Boards: are we being too soft? Do you think there are some members who just have got to go?

Everyone here can vote once in the poll. If you have additional comments, you can comment in this thread. Poll will run for 14 days (and stop being a sticky in 14 days too).

Chase

 

[trashKENNUT]

We should have a battle royal

for the UNDISPUTED WOOOOOORLD HEEEEEEAVYYYYYYWEIGHT CHAMPIONSHIP. Oh wait wrong company.

p.s: done my vote. Suddenly if my ass got a message from Chase and i got kicked. I am gonna murder you guys

Zac

 

[foggy]

Chase,

In page 2 of the thread, The Guide To Getting Hot Girls (of Any Type) you made a post saying you were going to ban a certain member if he kept spewing his emotional vomit of negative feelings all over the boards. That was TWO years ago and this member has continued to engage in this behaviour since then. He hasn't been banned yet.

Please get more strict - with this member, and in general. A 3 strike rule comes to mind.

 

[Sandman]

Yeah, some people whine. But to me it's not a big problem, just don't read their stuff.

On the other hand, I am new in the forum so maybe I do not feel as strongly as some of the other people who has put a lot of effort on this forum.

 

[Inbocca]

One of the things I really like about this forum is that it's not a club, where all the like-minded people get to flock together and chase any dissenters out. And if someone is stuck on a roadblock, even for an absurdly long time, they're given opportunity after opportunity to fix it with advice being repeated until everyone is blue in the face.

But there comes a time when you gotta say enough. Some people just aren't going to get it for whatever reason, and beyond a certain point they shouldn't be allowed to carry on using this place as their own personal frustration vent. But more importantly, Chase, backstory is right: you've made a few threats regarding banning members for that kind of behavior in the past - some directly, some generally - and not following through just encourages more of it.

 

[.....]

We should have a battle royal

for the UNDISPUTED WOOOOOORLD HEEEEEEAVYYYYYYWEIGHT CHAMPIONSHIP. Oh wait wrong company.

p.s: done my vote. Suddenly if my ass got a message from Chase and i got kicked. I am gonna murder you guys

Zac

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

It's not gonna be from me man. Trust me

 

[Regal Tiger]

We should have a battle royal

HELLS YEAH! Haha


Actual answer
I'm getting more active on the forums now than I've been in the past, so keep that in mind:

I voted that maybe some people are annoying, but I don't really care much if they go or stay. Doesn't effect me either way. But like mrre said, just don't read their stuff but on the other hand I haven't invested as much into the forum. So that's where I'm coming from.


In addition, I do also agree with Backstory: if you say you're going to ban someone then you do need to follow through on it. Whether I agree with actually getting rid of people or not, you are the leader of this forum and as such you do have to follow through on your word. That's my belief.

I do also agree that some kind of 3 strikes policy should be implemented as well as a kind of ranking system along with it. Give some of the people that clearly know what they're doing the ability to vote for different kinds of ranks for people that show up prominently when someone posts. That way other forum members can see if someone is just whining a lot or they can see that they have strikes against them, and most importantly, see why they have strikes against them. That way it doesn't mislead other people that are newer.

Having said that, if someone cleans up their act then the strikes should eventually fade away after some time. That way someone that is actively changing themselves isn't punished for their actions that were a long time ago and have since learned from. Keeps them motivated and [in theory] helps the forum in the process.
Example: I've certainly had some whiny posts (I think my first one was rather depressing and obviously the big one recently was). If I were to keep pushing that negativity forward then ya, should have something on my profile that keeps me from influencing other members.

My thoughts.

 

[Inbocca]

Example: I've certainly had some whiny posts (I think my first one was rather depressing and obviously the big one recently was). If I were to keep pushing that negativity forward then ya, should have something on my profile that keeps me from influencing other members.

It's not the whininess that needs to be punished. That's a behavior that just needs correcting. A lot of people (myself included) needed or still need an attitude adjustment or mindset overhaul now and then, even some of the more senior members have thrown a pity party or two. It happens. Then they read some articles or go out and get laid, and then they're over it. It's when they make no effort to fix the issues they complain about constantly, reject all forms of advice as not applicable to them, and continue to clog their threads and other people's with the same incessant negativity that we get to where we are now.

I think the three strikes thing could work, but I definitely don't think it should be public knowledge. Assuming that you only get a strike for breaking forum rules, who's to say how long those stay on your record? If you get a strike for some ruminating negative posting, then work on it a bit and find a solution to your problem, and go and post about something completely different, why should someone view your opinion differently because of something unrelated?

I think the system we've got now works well. Most of us know who the culprits are as it is, and when it gets out of hand the admins and tribal elders usually start getting more direct and blunt with their advice. That's warning enough. I feel like bans could be handled on a case-by-case basis much like they are now, just with more follow-through on those warnings. It's not like there's a plethora of people this applies to anyway.

 

[Regal Tiger]

It's not the whininess that needs to be punished. That's a behavior that just needs correcting. A lot of people (myself included) needed or still need an attitude adjustment or mindset overhaul now and then, even some of the more senior members have thrown a pity party or two. It happens. Then they read some articles or go out and get laid, and then they're over it. It's when they make no effort to fix the issues they complain about constantly, reject all forms of advice as not applicable to them, and continue to clog their threads and other people's with the same incessant negativity that we get to where we are now.

Totally agree, which is why I mentioned that "If I were to continue pushing that negativity". Like, don't believe any woman ever or all womenz are evil bitches or something like that. That's something that should probably warrant some kind of action from people.

Though [probably] because of my situation I still push that every man audio record all private and sexy liaisons for protection. I don't consider that negative, just an added and probably unneeded precaution

I think the three strikes thing could work, but I definitely don't think it should be public knowledge. Assuming that you only get a strike for breaking forum rules, who's to say how long those stay on your record? If you get a strike for some ruminating negative posting, then work on it a bit and find a solution to your problem, and go and post about something completely different, why should someone view your opinion differently because of something unrelated?

The only reason I believe that it should be public knowledge or a kind of ranking system is so that people can see the reason. So if someone is really great at online dating but have gotten some strikes recently someone could make an informed decision to try out that person's advice on what they're good at but avoid what they're terrible at. Or if someone just absolutely hated another forum member but still had good advice they could see the reason and still follow the attacking member's good advice but avoid their bullshit.

Stuff like that. It would be tricky in practice though...

I think the system we've got now works well. Most of us know who the culprits are as it is, and when it gets out of hand the admins and tribal elders usually start getting more direct and blunt with their advice. That's warning enough. I feel like bans could be handled on a case-by-case basis much like they are now, just with more follow-through on those warnings. It's not like there's a plethora of people this applies to anyway.

This is true for the most part, but ya never know when something could sneak through the cracks. Then again there's also the possibility that using a public ranking or strikes system would more than likely mark someone's good advice as well as bad.

 

[Big Daddy]

If I click to see results without selecting any option will I lose my right to vote?

 

[Cacc]

I just tied it. I'm not exactly a shining beam of positivity either, but I'm learning.

 

[Chase]

BD-

If I click to see results without selecting any option will I lose my right to vote?

I just clicked "show results", and at least for me it shows them without taking away my ability to vote.

So, you should be able to see the results. Then vote.

Although where's the fun in that?

Chase

 

[trashKENNUT]

To the negative guys,

Must be race thing. Though my article is on the works, here's what to take note as a guy who is Asian/black/etc. Not to rub salt or infuriate GC members.

1)Lips (if you are dark or brown)
2)Fundamentals (super lack or super aggressive + color = fucking murder someone)
3)How you do things
4)Natural Expression (resting bitch face due mainly to lips looking balmer)
5)Look like you know many things when you don't (asian and look super naive that it is irritating. life is not positive! to many people. when fundamentals are not handled, this is a HUGE HUGE PROBLEM)
6)Vibe (dark skin, amplify by 10x)
7)Moustaches (smile or humor must be a requisite when you are dark)

and so on.

Zac

 

[Hue]

I've usually been one to root for the underdog, and be hopeful that people can eventually change themselves if they really want to, even if that means running in circles for a while. That mentality has proved futile many times, but the success stories do exist.

For the members who have been here a while, I don't see why the managing Foes tool on the user control isn't just used, if it's just an annoyance of certain members,

Foes are users which will be ignored by default. Posts by these users will not be fully visible. Personal messages from foes are still permitted. Please note that you cannot ignore moderators or administrators.

Then again, if a member is being a black hole of negativity, that will push away newcomers or people who aren't familiar with some of the great parts of the forum, which is obviously a bad thing...


Why not a temporary ban after X amount of incidents of breaking board rules, which becomes increasingly longer? (banned for a week, month, 3 month, 6 month, etc. time period). That way members with excessively bad behavior don't clog up the boards, if they come back with shit falling out of their mouth they'll just keep getting kicked out, and it might give the person some time to correct what they were doing.


Hueman

 

[foggy]

SHE'S TIED AT 9-9 BOYS

 

[Kvothe]

I've definitely been negatively affected by some whiney posts, but I feel that there could be another potential solution.

Instead of banning a person-just blacklist them from certain topics (for example, ban the person from everything but field reports) that way they're forced to write field reports or fill their journal-basically being forced to take action or consequently not be able to share their experiences. Eventually, when they've shown enough change, give them some permissions back.

Just a thought on an intermediate step before going to banning another person.

 

[Yhaceed]

I've read some depressing shit and then I have to just try and forget about it which doesn't take long usually but it's like it's in the back of my mind. I want to totally forget I ever read it not have it in the back of my mind. The thing is I can usually tell at the start if it's gonna be like that. So all I'd have to do is ignore it and move on but I get curious or whatever and foolishly forge on. Those threads can be removed or any number of things done but kicking a forum member out is like burning bridges. Yeah you could do it but I don't know when that point should come. As was said maybe a temporary ban would work but you never know when people will change. Any one of us could be in the same position but so far life has been good so we're not. It reminds me of something like The Godfather and the guy gets killed cause he messed up too many times. Anyway it's your choice Chase.

~Yhaceed

 

[trashKENNUT]

so it is set.

somebody is getting kicked out. in a royal rumble.

i am in the rumble. and i'm going to win. so see you at Wrestlemania. Your title, your ass will be mind. Oh wait,
why am i posting on the wrong company.... ))

Zac

 

[Big Daddy]

Although where's the fun in that?

I was actually pondering if I should vote, since I've been traveling lately I lost a lot of forum action in the past weeks, so I wasn't sure if you were referencing a recent episode and therefore if I should vote. I rushed through new thread looking for a meltdown but I couldn't find any pertinent comment.

I'm all in for removing whiney members or people who can only focus on excuses and such, or are being unethical in some way, but I would say the subject of this forum does not lend itself to extremely nice-y talk amongst its members, for example. As long as the forum can continue with heated exchanges between members and "looker room talk," I'm OK with it.

So I'm going to vote "yes," with the above explanation in mind, though I don't think you guys are doing a bad job necessarily =) You and Franco are awesome, and probably the reason why this is my favorite forum.

 

[Seppuku]

Well, I would have said that I don't mind the whiners, and wouldn't read their comments.

But it's not just whining. Although claiming that "help appreciated" in the post, they later say "only comments from Chase and Franco", then go on with a quite aggressive attitude with those who are actually trying to help them. There is otherwise a very good spirit of people helping each other here. Aggressiveness is not welcome.

Besides, it is the same advice that has been distilled over and over and over again, over the years, by lots of people, including advanced guys, and that advice seems like gone with the wind. It feels like a waste of time and energy.

So I voted "yes".

Seppuku