Its funny.....on fourms modded NOT by that mod if a ban gets put down the mod in charge has to un-lift it, but in un-modded fourms they can ban freely?

GAY! (lol) and I meant that.

If you're breaking the rules it doesn't matter if there's a moderator or not. They have the right do ban you for being an ass and calling everything gay.

Very homosexual indeed.

Why do you always bring up old topics?

I bet in about November, we'll be hearing about RiSSeN and his TGT Account from you.

I'm not saying it's a bad thing. I just want to know why.

I dunno, Yeano, I think it's an important thing to discuss.

As a background though, I think this is the chronology of things: there was lots of spam and it was hard to stop spammers as well as being rather manually intensive to tag it all, so Spamview and AutoClean (which was like Spamview but deleted the messages rather than tagging and banned the IPs posting them) were introduced. But many times, innocents would be picked up and banned with AC, and while that was okay for modded forums cuz you could ask the mod of it to unban you, it was a problem for unmodded forums cuz no-one could unban there. Thus, access to the banlist was introduced.

So pretty much, the original intention of allowing all mods access to the IP ban list in unmodded forums was so that they could UNban, not ban. That was the point.

There are legit reasons for putting a ban on in unmodded forums, but only for serious offenses I think, like unrelenting spam or impersonations where it fools everyone (if it doesn't fool anyone, just tag), posting of other people's personal information, or use of tools they shouldn't be using to alter the appearance of the forum and the messages it contains.

I don't think bans should be put down in unmodded forums for things like flaming, trolling, swearing, posting off-topically, or other petty 'crimes'.

I do hope though that soon, it will require a form to fill out in order to ban someone with a required field that makes you explain the reason for the ban and it will time-stamp and name-stamp the ban.

I didn't mean to sound like this was a resolved issue. It just seems to have missed the "bum's rush" so to speak of when the issue was a hot topic.

Well to answer you question why, I think it's because CJ doesn't have reliable access to a computer at the moment. So he's not on GT for long periods of time and when he comes around, he might want to discuss things that other people already know about and may have discussed before.

And of course it's a new issue to all new members.

So anyways, has Rissen's TGT been halted yet?

mmmmmm...i <3 this thread

What Qwey said. Mods were given acces to the ban lists in order to unban people caught in an AC of a forum.

Just some mods use the ban list access to ban people. Qwey highlighted some cases where it is fine to ban in an unmodded forum, but people have been banned when a ban should only be decided by the forums mod (yes I know, unmodded forums don't have a mod to decide, so I'm, saying they shouldn't be banned in that situation)

Only the mods know if the whole banning in unmodded forums got some clarity and sorted out, or whether there are mods banning people in umodded forums for nothing seen as serious.

Oh, to take on Yeano's point, well mods were given access to umodded forums ban lists whilst I was a mod, so 2 years ago now. CJ has been on GT quite a bit in those 2 years and has probably taken part in one of the discussions about it in this forum.

"I just dont agree on having power to ban someone with no major "teacher" its like the Math sub can kick out the students but they arnt the person in charge?"

When a substitute is in a classroom they are the person in charge and they do have the authority to kick you out.

Mods being able to ban in unmodded forums is a direct result of tagging.

Now, what's REALLY fun is when mods get access to the ban lists in ALL forums. Cuz it's happened, and it'll probably happen again.

I'd say it's more of a direct result of mods over-using a tool that deletes spam and bans innocent people that posted during, before or after the flood occurred. Over-using, as in, using it on one page of spam because they're too lazy to check some boxes to save someone from being banned.

But honestly I'd rather it be the way it is now rather than how it was before we had access to the ban lists in unmoderated forums, because back then, it was almost impossible to get someone unbanned who had accidentally caught up in a spam-banning. Not impossible but, you had to make several "Mike please unban so-and-so from forum" before you got any reaction. I recall one time where a reg from [ngvs] was banned for over a month because of it. There would have been better ways to go about solving the problem but almost anything is better than how it was.

Well, in this case, I mean what I usually mean by "tagging": the entire system that allows ALL mods to be global.

If mods aren't taking care of posts in unmodded forums in the first place, they're not going to have banning power there.

Well I don't think it's necessary to go that deep to solve the problem. That's like cutting off your head to get rid of a runny nose.

All that needs to be done in order to get rid of the necessity of IP ban access in unmodded forums is a confirmation page at the end of an AC session that asks the mod to confirm the IP bans being entered on the list or deny them. That way, the worst that happens is some innocent person's post gets deleted.

If that were the case, the original reason why mods needed to have access to the lists would be dealt with, and while I'm sure there would be mods who would want to keep it with an argument about enforcement of rules because it takes a long time for mods to get picked and one wouldn't want forums to become lawless in the intervening time, I think a strong argument could be made for getting rid of IP access.

The problem is the patchwork solutions to problems that arise rather than addressing the thing that caused the problems and making it better. Trouble with spam? Here's AC. Trouble with AC? Here's IP banlist access. And each patchwork solution introduces more problems that need to be solved with more patchwork solutions.

My idea, which I don't thing anyone bothered to acknowledge in the mod forum was, once you've done an AC instead of it auto banning those IPs, it should ASK you which ones to ban. That way, you can simply choose NOT to ban an innocent but make sure the spammers have been banned.

This wouldn't require access to the ban lists, and would be a safer way to AC.

Read the reply right above yours

so, this is what you do on friday's? gametalk? what a loser

That post hurts my head.

it was supposed to

get a gf gawd

Again, there's a layer of irony here that you're apparently not seeing.

It's like if my brother were trying to insult me by saying, "Your mom's a stupid wh0re"

Well, maybe your brother knew you were adopted.

Similar dialog between "Shorty" and his sister (can't remember her name) from Scary Movie.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoif4La-90k