I just look at this thread as proof as how poorly this idea would go. It would be nothing more than an open debate on the banning of members. No point in that..
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
People who are banned
- Thread starter Joe Nerve
- Start date
I just look at this thread as proof as how poorly this idea would go. It would be nothing more than an open debate on the banning of members. No point in that..
- Oct 7, 2000
- 18,619
- 38,942
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Musicman basses
I think people are missing the point, and meant to say this in my response to @petrus61 . It's not about drama or arguing with the decision of the mods. It's about simply being informed, knowing if it's a permanent or temporary ban, and having some idea of what happened. Most people are curious what happened to a friend, when something happens to a friend. This would end any speculation.
Nope, I get it. It's a theory that simply wouldn't prove out in reality. And, again, this thread demonstrates why, imho.
In the case of such a list/announcement - long will the information stand? Like for a fixed period, until the ban expires or forever?
I was browsing and noticed the ban within ten minutes of it happening. I looked at his most recent posts and didn't see anything bannable. So I guess the mods deleted whatever was said immediately? I suppose I have some mild curiosity but I can live with the mystery. He and I used to argue more but that fizzled out. If he doesn't comes back I wish him all the best.
I think the only thing that needs to be considered is other people's feelings and the rules. It's really that simple. Your experience, the bonds you form, and your personal stake in TB are no more valid than someone else who offers the same respect for others and appreciates the rules are in place for a reason. To me it doesn't really matter if you form a personal bond with "Poster X" if said poster had such a hard time following the same rules that lots of others seem to adhere to without issue daily. Even if fifty other posters thought just as highly of the same poster, it wouldn't change the fact that they did something to earn those infractions.
Would you prefer that admin just erased all trace of banned posters? Short of the current method, they'd have to just have one giant list of banned posters, which means more work on their end, which when it all adds up, eventually leads to higher membership fees. Are you seriously proposing that TB, whose rules are very basic and non arbitrary (at least IMO) go out of their way to protect the dignity of people who dug their own ditch to begin with by not placing a "banned" banner under their name? It's not like they're exposing the names of crime victims, or even criminals for that matter. The whole idea is kind of trivial to me and seems to have morphed from just "morbid curiosity" (as another poster put it) into some kind of victimless moral crusade, which still leaves me baffled as to what its intentions are.
- Oct 7, 2000
- 18,619
- 38,942
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Musicman basses
I'm offering a suggestion to possibly benefit the forum. Not disagreeing with any rules, arguing them, nor looking to change them. You're reading a whole lot more into this than what I've posted. Throwing a lot of inaccurate assumptions around, too.
Last edited:
One thing it seems that has yet to be discussed is the business aspect of how and why warnings and bans are dealt with.
TB is, at least in part a business. They have support from music related concerns. If TB were allowed to be a free-for-all, Wild West, soap opera without rules, where everyone could run amok, the sponsors might think twice about their support.
TB has to strike a balance between maintaining civility, and ones right to express their opinion. They need to keep things under control without calling out someone publicly for their sins. The site has to remain a free exchange of ideas that will attract more members without becoming something that sponsors do not want their products associated with.
It is bigger than any one of us. If it is the opinions of the mods and/or administrators, that someone has become more of a liability to the business than they are an asset, then it's time to go. It's their sandbox, we just get to play in it. Don't let your cat crap too often where we play.
TB is, at least in part a business. They have support from music related concerns. If TB were allowed to be a free-for-all, Wild West, soap opera without rules, where everyone could run amok, the sponsors might think twice about their support.
TB has to strike a balance between maintaining civility, and ones right to express their opinion. They need to keep things under control without calling out someone publicly for their sins. The site has to remain a free exchange of ideas that will attract more members without becoming something that sponsors do not want their products associated with.
It is bigger than any one of us. If it is the opinions of the mods and/or administrators, that someone has become more of a liability to the business than they are an asset, then it's time to go. It's their sandbox, we just get to play in it. Don't let your cat crap too often where we play.
Precisely the point I had tried to make above, though a bit more eloquently put.
Bryan R. Tyler
TalkBass: Usurping My Practice Time Since 2002
Staff member
Administrator
Gold Supporting Member
Supporting Member
- May 3, 2002
- 28,949
- 20,940
- Disclosures
- Reviewer: Bass Player Magazine
Chris and Old Garage-Bender have both summed it up well.
People's infractions and bans are private unless they act so egregiously that it needs to be spoken of in public. It's simply not your business. If you really are such good friends with a person that you are concerned about why they're gone, you can contact them outside of the site. Otherwise asking to have a list of banned members and why really just amounts to virtual rubbernecking
People's infractions and bans are private unless they act so egregiously that it needs to be spoken of in public. It's simply not your business. If you really are such good friends with a person that you are concerned about why they're gone, you can contact them outside of the site. Otherwise asking to have a list of banned members and why really just amounts to virtual rubbernecking
- Oct 7, 2000
- 18,619
- 38,942
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Musicman basses
Disagree, and think you guys are putting a a very negative twist on something with positive intent.
But I'm off to a gig and feel its best for me to drop this now, and I will. There are more important things to concerned with. Maybe....
.
But I'm off to a gig and feel its best for me to drop this now, and I will. There are more important things to concerned with. Maybe....
.
Bryan R. Tyler
TalkBass: Usurping My Practice Time Since 2002
Staff member
Administrator
Gold Supporting Member
Supporting Member
- May 3, 2002
- 28,949
- 20,940
- Disclosures
- Reviewer: Bass Player Magazine
Nice. I'd like to say it was a typo, but I honestly thought I was reading "Bender" every time I saw your username
And you wouldn't be the first who did that.Nice. I'd like to say it was a typo, but I honestly thought I was reading "Bender" every time I saw your username
My take on KBD's ban.........obviously I must have not seen as many posts. The majority I read seemed well thought out, somewhat biased with his own feelings, which is normal, the Rickenbacker thing, no big deal. Was surprised he was one of the Grammar Police, but then again, I'm a stickler for it myself, so I was never the butt of any if that.
I was surprised he was a problem, but I don't read every subject post or even every post within those.
I did tend to read his take Bodeanly's, Nerve's and others that I found interesting in the past reads.
I'll miss his viewpoint, even if I didn't always understand where he was coming from with his responses.
I hope the "Lifetime Ban" was at least commensurate with his posting, but I'll guess we'll never know, which is unfortunate.
DiabolusInMusic
Functionless Art is Merely Tolerated Vandalism
Just as a friendly reminder, since it has come up a couple times now, you can tell if a ban is permanent one of two ways: 1) the user's profile cannot be viewed, you will get an error when you try and 2) you will not be able to use the @ symbol to tag their handle as their name is not in the system.
If anything, I would suggest changing the error message to something along the lines of "unfortunately this member struggled to abide by the rules at Talkbass and, for that reason, will no longer be welcome here." It would be a lot more clear than "error".
If anything, I would suggest changing the error message to something along the lines of "unfortunately this member struggled to abide by the rules at Talkbass and, for that reason, will no longer be welcome here." It would be a lot more clear than "error".
Well yeah - based on a lot of history, I'd agree. That said, the last time he was banned, upon his return he seemed to be on much better behavior. Like he genuinely taken a look at himself and decided some of his behavior was self defeating. Either that or he was on meds.
So on the whole, I was surprised this time. And I find it unfortunate, because I liked him as a member here.
If you're referring to conduct here on TB, I feel like I have to address this. We don't usually like to air out a user's dirty laundry, but since you opened the door...
You've never been banned from TB.
You've received three official warnings from mod staff here.
One in June 2016 - Rule 10: Trolling - you were putting down the buyers of a specific brand bass. That warning was worth 0 points, there was no ban.
One in July 2016 - Rule 1: Respect - You called someone a "Totalitarian A$$hat" and said their advice was worth nothing. That warning was worth 0 points, there was no ban.
One in November 2016 - Rule 3: Off Limits Topics: You had a string a posts in a thread that were over the line political. Intent doesn't matter. What is on the screen when you click "post reply" is what mattered. Rather than being issued multiple warnings for each post, you were issued a 2 point warning, and those points expired November 2016.
3 warnings, 2 total points. Never enough points at one time to trigger a ban, and a manual ban was never set.
This is all of course assuming you're not a past banned member under a different name.
Claiming you've been banned when 2 of your 3 warnings have been for 0 points? There's a sub-reddit that may interest you, it's titled "Quit Your BS"
To the rest of the users: You have to try to get banned from TB. The majority of the warnings/infractions that are issued are just that, warnings. After a user has a 0 point warning or two, then subsequent infractions may earn points, and it generally* takes at least 4 rule violations of a certain type (eg someone can have 3 rule one infractions and 3 rule 10 infractions and still not be perma-banned), pretty lenient if you ask me! Unless it's a blatant case of trolling or spam posting, no one is ever banned for one offense. If I were to show you a banned user's "rap sheet", you'd all probably be surprised at how long they stayed around for. We have a simple set of rules, it's not hard to not break them. 99.9% of the users succeed in doing that every day. We generally keep disciplinary action private, mainly because it's not anyone else's business. If you see a cop has someone pulled over, are you going to go up to them and ask why the cop initiated the motor vehicle stop? I'd say probably not, because it's none of your business and a situation doesn't concern you. Just because we're all member of this board and some people are friends, that doesn't mean you're privy to everything that happens.
*I say generally because there are extreme cases where people may be banned with less infractions, but it's not common.
