Question/Suggestion on Member Banishments

[BrickCop]

I've been elected as an O.com Union Steward...well ok, no one voted for me, I appointed myself. However I am not the only one who feels strongly about this issue.

It would be both helpful and enlightening if the O.com Mods gave the reason(s) to the general membership whenever a member, particularly a longtime member, is banned (temporarily or otherwise).

This info would remind members of what exactly they are or are not allowed to post. It would also demonstrate that banishment is being done in a consistent and fair manner. It would also serve as a deterrent for those who intentionally/repeatedly break whatever rules govern this forum.

On my PD all officer related discilpinary actions (suspensions, etc) are posted as Personnel Orders for all to see. I believe many other PDs operate the same way so we are used to seeing our names on a naughty list. Not to mention the fact that no one here uses their real name anyway.

Note: I am confident that this post/thread will not be deleted or locked as it is not profane and/or is not a personal attack on anyone. It is a valid inquiry as your answer will affect the thousands of members of this site.

I would ask any O.com members who post replies to not make personal attacks or crude remarks as this will only result in this thread being locked/deleted.

Thanks

[Groundhog]

I second the motion.

[TXLady]

Excellent suggestion...makes a LOT of sense to me.

[squad51]

RIGHT ON!

In my opinion this should...no it needs to be done and as soon as possible.

[OfficerDotCom]

Sorry folks but we will never EVER discussion issues related to members of these forums. Mostly because of privacy issues, but also because whether you post the reason or not, the poster in other ways will always suggest they didn't do x,y or z or exaggerate, and a public debate will ensue.

Every few months a core group gets up in arms about something, when in fact many times they exaggerate the facts to the broad forums and in reality (even in this current 'storm' only a handful of users were warned or removed and less than 15 threads closed.

Out of 6,000 POSTS since August 1, we had to intervene on just about four dozen, and a few of those were spam or just obnoxious posts by the same few users.

So really folks, try to relax a bit. Think about those stats. Thats not even 1% of posts that were problematic. We're not going to change any drastic policy because a handful of users are upset, and dozens of others are chiming in without 100% of the facts. And no, you're right, you don't know all the facts and thats while other users get riled up, because they are basing it on one side of the story. But again, we're not and will never discuss individual users issues publicly.

There are hundreds (literally) of new posts daily, sometimes over 1,000, and the number that actually have issues or get out of control is extremely low in the grand scheme of things.

NEVER is anyone banned unless they (with few exceptions):
a) Use profane, explicit language to an extreme degree
b) Post false or misleading information about another member, organization, etc
c) Spam the forums with commercial messages
d) Post messages disparaging the site, or advising how everyone should leave, and go to xyz site instead of here
e) Attack or threaten another user

That's really it. In looking at the list of those removed recently (less than 10 people this month), they all fall under those above.

Just keep in mind regardless of who the mods are and who the users are, there are many cases where both civilians and law enforcement professionals get way out of hand. Being in law enforcement doesn't make you immune from being banned when you attack someone else because you disagree with their opinion and choose to make it personal, rather than about the topic.


WebTeam

[BrickCop]

Thanks for your prompt reply.

With all due respect that same "small percentage" of members start or participate in the vast majority of topics. Again if a member violated one of your rules what is the harm in disclosing this? There is no expectation of privacy on a public internet BB.

[squad51]

OK policy is policy, but I think that where there may be a missunderstanding on thoughts and intentions is the following: We Cops are trained to find things out about what is going on...we like finding out about what is going on thats why we are cops, we are naturally curiuous, when we see things happening and do not see the reason for it, and or those reasons are covered up...we tend to want to know MORE thats who we are and what we do.


IT seems that a "core" group member has been removed from the board...a fairly popular person is now gone and we are all curious as to why. I would expect as the day goes on and more and more people on this board realize people are missing they too will want to know why. I expect this thread may get very busy.

I would hope that this person is allowed to return soon and in fact does return.


Oh well...

[OfficerDotCom]

No 'core' group member is missing from the forums, unless they specifically asked in an open forum or a private message to be removed, or advised they were leaving in a manner which attacked the site in a public forum which has now been removed. Sorry, but we will not debate this here. We're glad to respond to general policy inquiries, but we will NOT address individual members.

[OfficerDotCom]

Thanks for your prompt reply.

With all due respect that same "small percentage" of members start or participate in the vast majority of topics. Again if a member violated one of your rules what is the harm in disclosing this? There is no expectation of privacy on a public internet BB.

This isn't a 'public internet BB', this is a private forum run by Officer.com that has members who are bound by the Terms of Service of the site and forums, and likewise protected by its Privacy Policy. And you would be surprised, but while a small number certainly have lots of posts, that doesn't mean they are the majority and that also doesn't give that group any more right to attack other users, the site, use profanity, threaten users they don't agree with, etc. no more than someone who posted 1 post.

[Quopper]

When I was banned, I knew why, and I admitted it. Saying that the poster will always say they didn't do x, y, or z is a little off base. It is also hard to deny something that is now in proof in type under your username.

O.com, when you say that 10 people a month are banned, and that is a small percentage, that may be correct when you look at the TOTAL membership number, but in reality what percetnage of these members are responsible for the hundreds of posts a day. I would wager only 25% at best. So, with this number, the ten people a month that are being banned is a little more significant.

I have happily stayed out of the recent storm, but I noticed that a thread I started last night was removed?? I am confused by this, had someone not come along and told me that ONE OF OUR FAVORITES was banned, and I directed my thread towards him, would you have kept the thread open? Was it closed because you "suspected" it could get nasty when people realized this person was no longer allowed to play with us?

It seems like there is alot more editing and closing going on than ever before, is it really to keep us within the rules, or is it to start making O.com a new user friendly politically correct site?

I don't see how anything I said in this post is stepping over the line, and deserves to be edited or removed. I am asking honest questions and would like honest answers.

Thank you

[ProWriter]

I'd (still) just like a simple answer as to whether the "s-word" is permitted in the manner and context that most adults and most sub-adults often use it instead of words like "stuff" in normal, informal, social conversation. Likewise, I'd like to know how strictly you intend to enforce your rule even prohibiting abbreviations such as "BS" and so forth. It's not that I "can't" express myself without them, but on a forum such as this, I'd simply prefer to express myself as closely to the way I talk as possible, and I don't normally say "stuff" where the "s-word" happens to fit the context. Also, is it permissible to replace a letter or two without constituting "using explicit language to an extreme degree?" Item A in your criteria list seems much more lenient than the rules articulated elsewhere on this site pertaining to profanity. Thank you.

[TXLady]

I don't think that Brickcop's request was out of line at all. We are not asking you to violate anyone's privacy, only to be informed. Believe it or not, there ARE core members...when they suddenly disappear, they are missed immediately and a lot of people are left wondering and even concerned. We all make mistakes and are capable of doing something to get ourselves banned. I don't know of anyone on this forum with any sense that thinks they they are above the rules. IMHO...

[BrickCop]

This isn't a 'public internet BB', this is a private forum run by Officer.com that has members who are bound by the Terms of Service of the site and forums, and likewise protected by its Privacy Policy. And you would be surprised, but while a small number certainly have lots of posts, that doesn't mean they are the majority and that also doesn't give that group any more right to attack other users, the site, use profanity, threaten users they don't agree with, etc. no more than someone who posted 1 post.

I understand what you are saying but this being a private forum but it's not like you have to pass a background check to become a member. I have seen no indication that any member is seeking authorization to attack another person.

I'm just concerned that constructive criticism toward another member or the site itself will immediately be labled as an "attack" that will result in banishment.

BTW I agree with you 100% that people should not be advertising for other sites here.

Could the "Banishee" post via a 3rd party member the reason for which they were banned?

Quopper raises a good point. The core group here is like the Brady Bunch- You cant' take away Greg and expect nobody to raise a stink.

Take Sam the Butcher? No problem.

Take Jan? Maybe.

Alice? Possibly.

Cousin Oliver? Defenitely...

but Greg? No dammit, not without an explaination. (I hope bad satire is not a banishable offense).

[OfficerDotCom]

O.com, when you say that 10 people a month are banned, and that is a small percentage, that may be correct when you look at the TOTAL membership number, but in reality what percetnage of these members are responsible for the hundreds of posts a day. I would wager only 25% at best. So, with this number, the ten people a month that are being banned is a little more significant.

I can assure you, based on the list of people who were removed either because they REQUESTED IT or 'bragged' about getting banned when the original issue was not that serious, or were banned because of spam, illicit posts, etc, only one or two were significant posters in any regard.

[OfficerDotCom]

had someone not come along and told me that ONE OF OUR FAVORITES was banned, and I directed my thread towards him, would you have kept the thread open? Was it closed because you "suspected" it could get nasty when people realized this person was no longer allowed to play with us?

Not sure what thread you are referring to, but you can PM directly. Not even sure what 'favorite' you are suggesting was banned. No one on our ban list would appear to be of that nature. One person who does post a lot was temporarily restricted from posting after boasting that they would be banned and encouraging others to leave too as if no one would be left here to post. We're discussing that with them now privately, but no one has been 'banned' and discussion of that individual on the forums while the issue remains open will not be permitted.

Hope that helps.

Yes, all 'profanity' words are blocked. Doesn't mean you can't use 'BS' or *#%*^ or whatever to infer it. But this is still an open forum and we've just blocked the typical words. You can still type 'em, they'll just show up as **** ... people will still understand what you mean. As long as you're not going overboard with it, its fine.

I don't know of anyone on this forum with any sense that thinks they they are above the rules.

There are. Only human nature.

I'm just concerned that constructive criticism toward another member or the site itself will immediately be labled as an "attack" that will result in banishment.

NEVER will someone be banned for 'constructive criticism'. But if you call someone a moron, inbred, tiny toon, or worse....for stating an opinion you don't agree with, don't expect we'll just sit down and let the thread become more about two or three posters going after each other rather than the topic itself. No one has ever been banned for criticizing in a civil way someone's ideals, etc. And we really let that go on most times until its reported and/or gets ot of hand if its kept to an adult nature. A few posts lately that were most disturbing were police saying DIRECTLY something like 'i hope those people die, crash, burn, etc' .. sorry, but on any forums, thats just not right, regardless of the topic.

It seems like there is alot more editing and closing going on than ever before, is it really to keep us within the rules

Sorry but not sure why it seems like that. Maybe people are just reporting more threads, but I don't think so. Usually folks report the same thread a lot of times when its out of hand. As we said earlier, out of thousands of posts this month, only a handful have had to be dealt with. When there's discussion about it, it always SEEMS like its more, but really its not. We rarely edit a post unless it contains excessive profanity, is spam, etc.

Saying that the poster will always say they didn't do x, y, or z is a little off base

That may be the case for you, and thats fine. But oftentimes, it happens. Privately the user will say "i didnt do anything" to their buddies, who then come to their 'rescue' on the forums without knowing the full story.