The EoFF Debates.

[Peegee]

lol I was thinking the same thing, but Proots is the moderator so he gets to control the planet with his iron fist of doom!

[Agent Proto]

I'm trying to speed things up. If they miss the past questions, they'll have to answer them when they answer the next question, and I usually get to the next question when most of the candidates answered.

Well, the only people not to respond to question 2 is Big D, Earthworm Jim, and Carnage... and both EWJ and Carnage have yet to answer questions 1 and 2.

Ok, I'll move on to Question 3.

For those who haven't answered the past questions shall include them when they answer.

3. Do you support a banning system that'll give a week to three month ban suspension, or do you support the current "banned for life" system? Please explain why.

[ZeZipster]

I'm all for the 3 month system. People make mistakes, people post porn, and people like porn. So, pro-porn.

[Trumpet Thief]

Trowa: I'd say it varies on the situation if it is a limited ban, or a permanent one. Although, I'd say I support the 3 month ban one more, and if a member gets a limited ban a certain number of times, then give him a permanent ban. Because some of the time, an accident occurs, and someone is instantly banned, without a warning or even a limited one, which is not somthing I support.

Rubedo: So, we support the 3 month ban.

[eestlinc]

I support permanent bans after a warning or two. Banning should be taken seriously by members and staff alike. I also support Bruckner hailing.

[Big D]

[q=Proto]3. Do you support a banning system that'll give a week to three month ban suspension, or do you support the current "banned for life" system? Please explain why.[/q]I think it's a matter of circumstance and severity. In some cases, a temporary ban could be an effective measure; but then there are instances that almost demand a permanent ban.

Occasionally, a productive and likeable member screws up and goes off the rails a little, becoming spammy or flamey out of boredom or a sense of invulnerability. In such a case, a temporary ban could be seen as "cooling time", to give them a taste of "life without EoFF", an incentive or reminder to get back in order. It's basically what happens now with the EoEO/World Events ban system. An infraction is met with a temporary revocation of privileges. Kind of like a prison sentence, as opposed to the "death sentence" of a permanent ban.

However, a permanent ban is sometimes the only way to go. The internet is oftentimes a nasty place, with plenty of horrible people with nothing better to do than to cause trouble for other people. EoFF's "family friendly" policy is maintained by a fairly strict enforcement of a few simply, easy-to-follow rules. The rule against posting pornogrpahic material, for instance. If the maximum ban was a mere three months, then EoFF would basically be saying to its members, "come on in, you're welcome to post pornography once every three months". This would clearly be unacceptable. "Banned for life" is the only way to deal with those who commit serious breaches of the rules, such as persistent abuse of forum privileges, blatant disregard for the rules on spam and flaming, and the posting of inappropriate or offensive materials. If somebody makes a conscious decision to post something that they know will attract that kind of penalty, then they should be prepared for the consequences. Similarly, if someone does such a thing unwittingly, then a permanent ban can still be justified:
Either (1)they simply have no idea that we have those rules, which is hardly a state of affairs that should be encouraged, or (2)they lack any personal standards of decency and lack any regard for the opinions and wellbeing of others, which again is a sign of somebody who does not belong in a family-friendly forum, or (3)their hard-drive is so full of objectionable materials that they can post something grossly inappropriate without realising it, which is something that could easily be repeated, which serious consequences for EoFF's members and reputation.

Take a real-life analogy: posting bills on a public noticeboard. If somebody posts a bill that is controversial, that raises the ire of a few people, they might be censured for doing so and temporarily blocked from using that noticeboard. This is the equivalent of a temporary ban, a reasonable and justifiable step. However, if somebody uses a public noticeboard to post explicit, objecitonable material, then they should never be permitted to use that board again, ever - even if the dodgy bill merely got mixed up in what they had intended to post. Such negligence should not be treated lightly, since the effects for other people are exactly the same. Permanent banning may seem harsh, even unfair in some circumstances, but it is certainly not without a strong, unshakeable foundation of reason.

[edczxcvbnm]

I for one do not support the current banning system. If you slip up and post something you shouldn't have then you are screwed. Sorry I clicked on the wrong file but I am only human. I am not perfect and I don't pretend to be perfect. Instituting such a rule would mean that you obviously are arrogant enough to believe you are perfect. No one is perfect and they should pay a price.

The price they pay isn't going to be a 1 week or 3 month ban. Every case should be reviewed and then be given a punishment worth of the crime. Just like the legal system certain rules should have certain ranges. 1 week to 3 weeks depending on the outcome of the trial. Everyone can appeal and be judged by their peers on a randomly selected jury.

Its not like it would be take that long for each trial. Everyone gets 1 post to defend themselves. Then the jury gives out the verdict and the judge(admin) dishes out the sentence.

I am not saying the system is perfect by any means. I don't know its feasibilty as bans and things like that are kept in the dark here. Under this new system things will be out in the open in a 'legal' archive for people to pull up past cases and rulings to help defend themselves.

Of course in extreme cases there would be no due process. A board attack? They are not members but mearly terrorists and evil doers. They have no rights.

The time for change is now! If you vote for anyone other than the Rulers you are voting for a tyranny!

[Big D]

[q=edczxcvbnm]If you slip up and post something you shouldn't have then you are screwed. Sorry I clicked on the wrong file but I am only human. I am not perfect and I don't pretend to be perfect. Instituting such a rule would mean that you obviously are arrogant enough to believe you are perfect. No one is perfect and they should pay a price.[/q]I disagree. Bannings for accidental slip-ups can be justified on numerous grounds:

Bans aren't just about punishment, they're about prevention. If someone's negligent enough to "accidentally" attach the wrong file or link to the wrong image, then banning that person's account removes a threat of the same thing happening again. If a poster takes a reasonable amount of care, such errors should not occur. Banning people who do slip up in that way prevents a recurrence. Of course, minor infractions don't warrant an outright ban, and they don't receive it either.

Also, honesty is a crucial factor. Who decides whether a violation was deliberate or accidental? Anyone can attach an inappropriate image than say, "OMG! I thought the filename was 'my new car' when it's actually 'yaoi with cucumbers'. Sorry, my mistake, won't happen again." Similarly, someone who flames could go ahead and plead innocence - "I didn't mean to say that the Admins prefer goats, honest! Just a typo."
A "trial by jury" format, like you suggest, also has shortcomings. The 'popularity contest' principle can apply too easily, with members rallying to support a 'fan favourite'. A legendary figure like HOORJ or HOOTERS would be unlikely to receive equal treatment compared to a new or unknown member.

Allowing the defence of 'honest mistake' would create new avenues for abuse, with devious and dishonest members "inadvertently" committing serious breaches and getting away with it. There are few reliable ways to assess the honesty of someone's mistake; in the interests of protecting the forum, outright bans are the only way to go for members showing a blatant disregard for the forum's rules.

[Peegee]

You cannot be banned for having a 'bad' opinion. You cannot be banned for doing things outside of the forums. You can ONLY be banned for things you post in the forums. So this presents a very simple solution: give the posters responsibilty to ensure they did not do a slip-up or whatever. If you make attachments, view them yourself. If you make a image post, look at it. In fact, look and review your post before posting (preview option) and after (literally last minute review). Since it's always possible for people to review their post after the fact (laziness or busy-ness is not an excuse), there's no excuse for "screwing up" or "accidentally choosing porn".

Which is why I think the banning style is perfectly fine. No "temporary bans" or "guilty until trial is finished" type of system. It works for EoEo because sometimes we get emotionally heated, and that sort of thing typically only happens in EoEo anyway, so there's no reason to implement it elsewhere.

[edczxcvbnm]

This is what makes the system so great. You define the penalty and the jury decides. Trials are quick. Person is put on notice immediatly and has 1 day to post a plea to the jury and then each jury dude/dudet posts their verdict. If they miss then guilty. The jury doesn't have to be in agreement either. Majority rules and if a jury person does not show up...no loss. The person in question would also as a result be banned from posting any where else or viewing as such.

The temp banning is also a good idea because it will show the person a world with out EoFF. I KNOW it is hard to imagine such a world and those who go through the process will have a new found view and respect for the forum. They will be grateful they had a second chance. A warning is good but it doesn't teach people much of anything. Kids are yelled at 12 times or more before they go to bed. The warnings are not entirely useless though. They servre the purpose to put those who have been temp banned back in place with out further question.

Now PG...You say its okay to use the temp ban in one forum but not another? Thats FORUM DISCRIMIATOIN! I will not stand for such attrocities. I believe in a world wide web without forum discrimiation. All forums are created equal!

[krissy]

*throws a pie into various political faces*

[krissy]

viva la revolution

PROTEST

PROTEST


THIS IS MY POSTER:

[krissy]

EOFF NOT SLACK OFF


DOWN WITH BIG OIL

[krissy]

FORUM WAR STARVES THE CHILDREN

[Del Murder]

Reno speaks for the rest of the Secret Elitist Party.