User Bans and Appeals

[iansjack]

As Brendan is no longer a member of this forum, let alone a moderator, it is unreasonable - and increasingly irritating - for you to keep demanding an answer as to why he did what he did.

I was leaning towards being in favour of unbanning bzt but, in view of these continued posts, I would now (if I had a vote on the matter) vote to continue the ban.

[DavidCooper]

Yes, that's acceptable and I promise I won't create new accounts, as long as you promise me the moderators won't delete my question about the removal of the flameless OS/Z topic, and I'll get an answer why Brendan did that...

You don't need an answer to that - you won the point just by drawing attention to it. No one can answer your question but Brendan, and I don't see any reason why he'd want to?

What actually happened here? We had an argument between bzt and a rogue moderator, and bzt stood up to him even though he knew it risked a ban, but he did this on point of principle. I haven't seen any unacceptable behaviour from bzt aimed at anyone other than Brendan, and all the wayward stuff aimed at Brendan was a justifiable reaction to Brendan's bad behaviour. Who did he harm through this? Did he damage the community or did he help to expose a problem with it? If a prefect in a school bullies someone and that person hits back, should they both be expelled? If the victim keeps speaking up for himself afterwards, should that push things in favour of expelling him too? I don't think so - that would be like an extension of the bullying. The fair way to deal with that is to let him back in and keep an eye on his behaviour afterwards - if no new reason ever comes up for a ban, then there is clearly no need for a ban. In the unlikely event that he does something unacceptable to the community after being let back in under his own identity (as opposed to going under the radar by posing as someone new and vandalising the wiki), then the whole community will see that a ban is appropriate. I would be very surprised if there's ever a need for that to happen. Anyone in bzt's situation deserves to be given a second chance, although in his case, unless I've missed something, it shouldn't even be described in those terms as he doesn't appear to have done anything immoral in the first place. What's his worst offence? He demanded that all his contributions to the wiki be deleted because he was abused by the community he had given them to. In reality, I think we all owe him an apology for standing back and allowing him to be abused.

(And if he promotes a file system that a moderator considers to be flawed in its design, all the mod needs to do is add a warning to it making a recommendation that people check out better alternatives - then its up to people to do their own proper research and apply their own intelligence to identify the superior design.)

[glauxosdever]

Hi,


While I still think that bzt's initial ban was unreasonable, I'm starting to think that it should not be lifted actually. As iansjack stated, these posts are starting to be increasingly irritating and, may I add, pointless.

@bzt: Demanding answers from a banned former moderator (who won't return even if he gets unbanned, for his own reasons) is not something you should do when your goal is to get unbanned. Don't you know what diplomacy means? Yes, Brendan was not right at the time to ban you. But you have basically proven with these posts his inner instincts were right.

Also, the posts by "tempbb1" should be probably put back in place, as they give insight into the entire situation here (assuming they have been hidden and not deleted).


Regards,
glauxosdever

[bzt678]

Hi,

you're right, and I'm not expecting answer from Brendan you know. The problem shifted slightly, because my question was DELETED from the "Bans and Appeals" topic and what you don't see, I'm still getting IP BANNED constantly, so I have to figure out new ways all the time just to read your responses. Unfortunately I don't see it any different to what Brendan did. I seriously don't think removing an appeal and trying to ban the appealer would be any better (and I'd like to say sorry for JAAman and Antti, because I know it's probably Combuster's doings and I'm sure they have nothing to do with it).

I honestly don't think this topic serves any good for the community if moderators are allowed to remove appeals and IP ban appealers. I think that seriously undermines the whole trust.

Kind regards,
bzt

[DavidCooper]

I seriously don't think removing an appeal and trying to ban the appealer would be any better (and I'd like to say sorry for JAAman and Antti, because I know it's probably Combuster's doings and I'm sure they have nothing to do with it).

Combuster is not your enemy. Be patient and trust the mods - they need time to fix things.

[bzt678]

Combuster is not your enemy. Be patient and trust the mods - they need time to fix things.

I really would like to think that. But Combuster hasn't answered my question. He banned me when he wrote I harassed Brendan, so that I couldn't answer. When he was called upon (very politely may I add, see attachment), he deleted that, my appeal, my request for unbanning Brendan so that he can answer, Brendan's insult, and issued an IP ban to silence me. I still waiting for answer from Combuster what was it that we thought to be "harassing Brendan", because that's not clear. As far as I know unlike Brendan, Combuster is still a moderator.

As I wrote this kind of behaviour seriously undermines the trust in the moderators.

Btw, if moderators know any way how to write to "Bans and Appeals" topic without ban evading, I'd like to hear that.

Kind regards,
bzt

[kzinti]

You are harassing right now.

[Solar]

He's been constantly blocked and told to go away, been told to "be patient and sit it out" after having been given the short end of the stick for quite some time now -- unjustified so, it seems being agreed on.

I don't agree with his conduct either, but I can perfectly understand why his patience might be running a bit short.

[JAAman]

the moderator staff has agreed to convert the existing ban on bzt into a temporary ban, to be lifted on December 7th, 2018 on the following condition:

-no further ban evasion

this includes replying to this message

any further attempt at evading the new ban (including to reply to this message) will result in re-instating the permanent ban


Thank you,

-The OSDev.org forum moderator team

[MichaelPetch]

I'd be curious to know what the 1 month temporary ban is punishment for? I hope it isn't because he evaded bans because of d*ck moves by a mod(s) in the past. I think it would be a stretch to call his posts here as of late harassment. Seems more like he's trying to show the result of past d*ck moves and why he is where he is. I'm guessing this is seen as some kind of compromise. I do not see what 1 month solves. What does it change? What lesson does it teach? Probably suggest it probably only creates more resentment, and I don't see how that would help. If his crime was heinous you would have him permanently banned.

I'd say forget the temporary ban, and clean the slate. If he is in violation in the future you can deal with him then. If there are others in the same boat as bzt I'd apply the same idea to them as well.

I don't actually know bzt personally. I don't think I've ever had correspondence with him or even interacted directly with him in forum postings. I'm pretty neutral in all this. I gain or lose nothing in promoting the idea of dropping the temporary ban.

I'd go one further. I'd probably offer amnesty to Brendan. Don't make him a mod, but unban him (assuming he still has a ban). I know he may not want to ever be active here again but I'm not sure what his ban actually gains now. being stripped of his power seems like the appropriate punishment because he abused it. *If* he were to ever return - you deal with him if he steps out of line as a regular user.

[Solar]

I'd go one further. I'd probably offer amnesty to Brendan. [...] Being stripped of his power seems like the appropriate punishment because he abused it.

I'd prefer to think that the ban was not about the privilege abuse (which indeed would be sufficiently sanctioned by revoking mod status), but the toxic and bullying behavior. I summarized [1] and later elaborated on it in an opinion piece intended to dissociate the discussion from the actual case [2].

I am a bit vexed that apparently no-one except myself is seeing beyond the privilege abuse, which I consider just the topping on it all. A person that, after insulting someone and being told "that was insulting", reacts with the equivalent of "cry me a river, snowflake" and making fun of you instead of saying "sorry"? That is really par for the course at osdev.org?

[Antti]

The moderator team negotiated a compromise. It was also a good test that we were able to do teamwork. Hopefully bzt understands and does not break the "agreement" because, after all, the user account will be welcomed back! We don't have too many active members and losing even a single one is a loss. Brendan could be a member also, and I think no-one mentioned banning him until he "banned" himself by forcing chase to make the decision. His contributions to this community were very valuable, and it is a big loss that he wanted to leave. I think the community would still welcome him back, as a normal member? I think that is a good sign of how liberal the community is.

On the other hand, Solar's opinions are very valid, concerning the acceptable behavior in general. It seems that the atmosphere on IRC is much more relaxed. How can we improve the forum so that it would not be commented like "another drama on the forum" or similar?

[MichaelFarthing]

How can we improve the forum so that it would not be commented like "another drama on the forum" or similar?

You have done.

I have been away for a couple of months as other things have taken my time, but in any case I was feeling less and less inclined to visit. Having read the recent drama and seen the slower, more considered team-based moderation that has now appeared and the level-headed forgiving reaction of many ordinary members the whole atmosphere feels quite new and refreshingly friendly to me.

I would make the following small additional suggestions (reflecting custom in a chess forum where I am a regular participant).

As a first step members should be asked to edit their own posts to remove offensive material, or if necessary mods should do this. If the latter happens I think it would be courteous to add a comment that this has been done. (eg just by saying "some possibly offensive language removed" or similar)

if a post needs to be deleted this should be stated in the thread with the reason.

I used to find it frustrating here that my posts sometimes disappeared without comment or PM from a moderator. I think in most cases, if not all, the cause was actually the removal of a post to which I had been replying.

[Kazinsal]

I have what I believe to be an interesting perspective on bans and appeals both as an active forum moderator on another community of marginally larger size (one that could be generally considered more internally hostile and possibly even toxic in some aspects) and technically as a "ban evader" here.

It's been eight years since my first account here was permanently banned. I took it as a sign I needed to reshape my attitude, so I took a year and a bit off and re-registered under a different username. Eventually I changed my username to the one I use everywhere else when I realized that even though some people, including some moderators, knew who I was, there didn't seem to be much of a threat of my being re-banned since I was no longer an inflammatory troll. Oddly, around that time, I stopped posting quite as much and my involvement in hobby operating systems development took a back seat to other things. But I still check in occasionally, and most recently have now checked in to see, well, this mess. I will leave my comments out of this thread because I think that it'd be out of place (the drama is over, no need to extend it) and I'm a bit late on the draw, it seems.

From the administration and moderation perspective: On $otherCommunity we tend to give 24-48 hour posting probations (temporary bans from posting outside of sections that are for making requests and appeals to the staff) when people are being inflammatory. Any permanent ban is really more of an "indefinite" one with a minimum number of months before "eligibility for parole", so to speak. Yes, there are users who consistently fail their ban appeals. Yes, there are users who ban evade and get their "parole hearing date" reset. I think the difference between ban appeals there and the concept of doing ban appeals here is that the community here doesn't *need* to ban people often, and when it does, it's usually due to a consistent pattern of rules infractions and maybe only a few happen a year. It's kind of hard to see the actual numbers from this side. On $otherCommunity we have to hand out bans like that usually two or three times a month on average because members are either being consistently poor to each other or to specific other members, or because they're committing severe rules infractions related to the MMO that community is the official forum for, eg. cheating or severe griefing. This isn't something we really have to deal with on OSDev.org, partially because that external entity doesn't exist, but also because the forums are their own logically separate community from the rest of the OS development communities.

In any case, it's good to see a change to a more open process in the way that bans are being handled. Adaptation of the system to fit the evolving climate it exists in is key to survival.

[bzt]

the moderator staff has agreed to convert the existing ban on bzt into a temporary ban, to be lifted on December 7th, 2018

Thank you! Could you please lift the ban on my wiki account too?

Thanks,
bzt