About Banned Members

I see what you’re trying to do with this thread, but it’s not quite shaking out that way. I think it could be a good thing to hear the critique of the community on this point. I mean, clearly The Banning wasn’t worth it. I like the idea that was tossed out a couple of pages ago about suspensions rather than bans. I agree with many that banning is more appropriate for issues of harassment and similarly severe transgressions, particularly since it’s not about money.

You weren’t talking about spammers and bots when you threw out that statistic. FWIW, when people exaggerate numbers it raises my suspicions, so the point didn’t hit. Thank you for listening.

Sorry, but I disagree completely and would ban them again in a heartbeat. Suspensions don't work. Tried it already. The rules here are not arbitrary. If they were, no one would follow them and no one would respect them and then we wouldn't have much of a forum. Just my 2 cents.

 

Right. You can't just allow people to not follow your rules, no matter if you like the person or not. That would be setting a bad example.

 

Regarding this thread, I'm just trying to be transparent and let peeps know that we don't ban members on a whI'm and that we take it seriously. We don't want to ban anyone. Period.

As far as numbers go, counting robots and spammers that have been banned, it's probably in the hundreds of thousands. Actual people I have no idea. Regarding the 99.9999%, was simply trying to make a point.


Ok, I'm going to try another analogy because it's apparent I'm really good at them, NOT! Let's say you built a really nice garden with LOTS of plants. And every day your neighbor comes over and takes a plant out of it and puts it in his own garden. Hey you've got lots of plants. Surely you can go without one or two? No?

No one stole the forum. The members can enter as many forums as they please without taking away from one. I think this metaphor was worse.

It's like opening a booth for free samples beside another free sample booth. But whoever's booth it is can make the rules for that booth. Free samples being a metaphor for a platform.

 

Maybe he should just stop with the analogies, lol.

But I still don't see how you don't understand the premise.

 

No one stole the forum. The members can enter as many forums as they please without taking away from one. I think this metaphor was worse.

It's like opening a booth for free samples beside another free sample booth. But whoever's booth it is can make the rules for that booth. Free samples being a metaphor for a platform.

I don't see it that way. And totally not saying someone "stole" the forum. It'd be more like the first booth worked hard to get all their free samples to give out and then the second booth took the samples from the hardworking first booth when they weren't looking and then gave out the first booth's samples as their own.

Gotta say, I think I nailed the analogy that time. Just sayin.

 

I don't see it that way. And totally not saying someone "stole" the forum. It'd be more like the first booth worked hard to get all their free samples to give out and then the second booth took the samples from the hardworking first booth when they weren't looking and then gave out the first booth's samples as their own.

Gotta say, I think I nailed the analogy that time. Just sayin.

You did compare it to stealing in both metaphors. Taking something when someone isn't looking is stealing. You've compared them to stealing multiple times, although they aren't taking things from you. People can go to multiple forums.

 

Yea its definitely not steeling. It was someone asking others to try something new. Most would of kept both. It just sounds like the forum is scared that its not the best and people will leave if offered an alternative and never return.

 

You did compare it to stealing in both metaphors. Taking something when someone isn't looking is stealing. You've compared them to stealing multiple times, although they aren't taking things from you. People can go to multiple forums.

Perhaps. But if said member(s) didn't know about the other forum until they were contacted by a banned member's buddy or buddies, trying to recruit for the other forum, using our system to do so mind you, that's called poaching in the forum world. And it is heavily frowned upon, underhanded, distasteful and tacky. Now, if those members found the other forum on their OWN and decided to join the other forum? Then all is well, no harm no foul.

Sorry if I'm not making myself clear. We just ask that you not do that using our forum.

 

I just want to say, thank you Mike, Lucy, Coradee, and jdhef for all the work you do on here! I really appreciate all the time and effort you put into running fishlore

 

DoubleDutch nailed it

 

In case you didn't know, it's not that people can't be a part of other forums. It's that you can't use a forum to recruit members to a different forum of the same type. You can do it through some other means though. Not through FL's system.

Yes, thanks, I’m following along. I just think it’s rather dramatic to ban people for telling others where a former member can be found.

If Mike thinks all this drama is worth it, then, well, that’s interesting.

 

Yep warnings are usually sent privately or they get posted on their profile if necessary. And personal info will always get edited out of the public threads. That's to protect the members since we get crawled by countless robots looking for such info. If you need to send personal info use the conversation feature and don't post it in a thread. And the thing with bans is that since we don't discuss them as mentioned in the first post of this thread, you may only be getting one side of the story.

I get that. Read it. Thing is. It's not transparent. Perception is reality. I'm a member of both forums (and many others) and this one is by far superior in every way except transparency (moderating). I honestly believe no body would leave and never come back were it not for all the banning. You can't beat fishlore otherwise. Such a shame.

 

Welp, I've had enough of this merry-ground. Mike has tried to address the concerns expressed in this thread.
It's apparent anything he says will be thrown back at him.
Rules were broken. People were banned. End of story.

Thread closed.

 

I have no problem with the rules, but let me see if I got this correct our privet PM are not privet ? If not than why call them privet ? That just seems to lull us into thinking we can talk to each other through PM's without anybody being to read our privet stuff. If this truly is the case that would be very bad. Is that not CENSORSHIP, very bad.

Hi, not sure if this is addressed later in the thread, but I'll address it now...

Your PM's are private, Moderators, CAN NOT, I stress CAN NOT view PM's. However, if a member reports a PM, then that specific PM is visible to moderators as part of the report (understandably), but we cannot willy nilly scroll through PM's like a Facebook news feed. Nor can we, following a report, view any other PM sent, it is purely the reported PM that we see.
Visitor messages are however visible to all members, not just mods.
If there is a very serious issue developing, then the administrator (not mods) of Fishlore, can if necessary, retrieve and view all PM's to/from any member. (this is not easy, nor something that is done regularly, but necessary to comply with various laws)

 

Re the 'stealing'/poaching aspect.
Let me put it this way.... In the USA where litigation is high, and data security is higher.
If Target gained access to, and used K-Mart's database of customers or marketing platform to e-mail a promotion, there'd be a law suit claiming breach of privacy.

Imagine: "oh you shop at costco, and as a member, we're contacting you to come be a member of costco2.0"; you'd all hit the roof with complaints - how'd they get my data?

EDIT: Or another way of putting it, you're a member at Costco, and someone starts their own membership based retailer. That someone is a Costco member, and then uses that membership to go into Costco and start handing out flyers to Costco members to go join their shop. You'd find that pretty odd that Costco would let that happen in their own stores, and wonder why that person isn't banned from Costco and their membership withdrawn.... Why should online forums allow the behaviour?

Fact is, Fishlore is a big database of e-mail addresses and members, you as members, gave your details to Fishlore, not the world. If you happened to give your details to someone else on the forum (equivalent to saying yes, share my details with 3rd parties), and they contact you via those details, then fine, you gave that up.

We, as a forum operators (admins and mods) have an obligation to protect the membership and your data from what essentially amounts to SPAM (unsolicited contact for another enterprise).

Forget that it may have been another forum, what if it was something more sinister, or unsavoury? you'd all be reporting the messages/contact, and probably trying to sue Fishlore for allowing it to happen. Fact is, Fishlore is NOT a mass-marketing service, it is a forum, with it's own membership.

It's protection of data, protection of members from unsolicited contact, protection of a customer base (yes I used that term). If all y'all want to go giving out details to other members, then do so at your own peril. Fishlore is not responsible for what you might get in the mail (so to speak), but for those that didn't sign up for that, then we'll try our best to protect you. Fishlore's systems aren't meant for mass-marketing activities.

I hope that puts some perspective on it.