Start banning members

S-B · May 30, 2016

NamePros and its leadership has gone soft.

Start banning toxic members like @Michael Ehrhardt. It is utterly absurd that he is allowed to troll the forum. I'd be willing to bet he has received more dislikes and reports in the last week than any other member has in the history of the forum. It's pathetic that he's allowed to represent such a great community. The thing that disgusts me the most is he's being defended by NPs leadership.

If you want to spit in our faces, do it yourself.

Now I know the response is going to be that he's been warned. Whatever. With that many reports he should be banned.

Solved: https://www.namepros.com/posts/5553087/

Thread closed.

Billy Wagner · May 30, 2016

NameZest said:
Shane you have a history of posting publicly your dislike of both websites and individuals, It seems you just cannot help but be controversial or the center of attention. Even when it comes to "dissing" websites you eventually attack individuals. I am sorry but I am not the type to just sit back, especially as this is a "community". Many of your posts have been "toxic" imo as far as personal affronts I have never posted any such things on here you seem to do it all too often. I think you are an only child used to getting your own way, anyone who has read your posts has caught you being dishonest and down right childish. People who live in glass houses Shane should not throw stones! Besides you are leaving anyway ... Right?

I completely agree with NameZest. @Shane Bellone, you've been more than happy to jump down a fellow users throat many times. How about you bump your "goodbye" post once more and call it a day.

TRY · May 30, 2016

domainmarket.io said:
I completely agree with NameZest. @Shane Bellone, you've been more than happy to jump down a fellow users throat many times. How about you bump your "goodbye" post once more and call it a day.

I believe in freedom of expression.., I have a problem when someone aggressively spams the threads with an agenda. If we all spammed the threads with a copy paste job over and over the good content will be buried by garbage. That said I haven't noticed that behavior from him as much recently.

Billy Wagner · May 30, 2016

Brandingtheweb.com said:
I believe in freedom of expression.., I have a problem when someone aggressively spams the threads with an agenda. If we all spammed the threads with a copy paste job over and over the good content will be buried by garbage. That said I haven't noticed that behavior from him as much recently.

If it is an ongoing issue I have complete faith in the NamePros staff handling it.

JB Lions · May 30, 2016

Eric Lyon said:
Shane, we have a process that we follow for everyone. There are no feelings or bias involved with it.

Our process is strictly procedural, and it allows those who are willing to learn and abide by the rules the chance to do so.

There is somebody else, you know who I'm talking about. 3 infractions in the last 43 days for the exact same thing. Infractions for the same thing, month after month. First, you're the admin. You can click that ban button anytime you want. If it's procedural, you have some system, then it's kaput. How many times, 20, 30 what, for the same thing? I think it's more you don't want some situation like you had in the past. Ban somebody and then they hop on some blog crying about it. How do you explain that person still being here? You don't think you've given them enough chances? Do you think they care about some infraction if they do the same thing over and over again? They have no respect for you or you would only have had to warn them once. You know it's going to happen in the future as well. So more unnecessary work for you or the mods because you don't want to handle it for some reason.

For the person in this thread, yes he's trolling. When you have some thread about what you're grateful for and somebody mentions god and he comes in saying there is no god, it's an invention blah, blah, blah, not the thread for it. I believe you removed that post. There is actually a thread for that already.

Eric Lyon · May 30, 2016

JB Lions said:
3 infractions in the last 43 days for the exact same thing.

Each warning has a specific point value and expiration date assigned to it based on the offense. The expiration dates range from 2 months to "indefinite" depending on how serious it is. Thread crashing, while an undesirable action, is not one of the more serious offenses (there are much bigger issues that we deal with on a daily basis), especially when it's infrequent. The two most recent occurrences you're referring to occurred over a month apart.

There's a similar issue with certain members being less friendly toward new members than we'd like, and the warning system is forgiving enough that if they don't do it too often, it won't result in a ban.

While neither unfriendly nor thread crashing messages are desirable, they are not something worthy of a ban by themselves if they are happening infrequently enough. Everyone has a bad day now and then, and everyone blows off a little steam occasionally. Some of our top contributing members would have been banned years ago if this policy didn't work the way it does. We wouldn't want that to happen over an occasional grumpy day. That said, if it happens enough in a short period of time, it will result in an account's closure.

It's all about compromise and understanding, when both are reasonable.

JB Lions · May 30, 2016

Eric Lyon said:
Each warning has a specific point value and expiration date assigned to it based on the offense. The expiration dates range from 2 months to "indefinite" depending on how serious it is. Thread crashing, while an undesirable action, is not one of the more serious offenses (there are much bigger issues that we deal with on a daily basis), especially when it's infrequent. The two most recent occurrences you're referring to occurred over a month apart.

There's a similar issue with certain members being less friendly toward new members than we'd like, and the warning system is forgiving enough that if they don't do it too often, it won't result in a ban.

While neither unfriendly nor thread crashing messages are desirable, they are not something worthy of a ban by themselves if they are happening infrequently enough. Everyone has a bad day now and then, and everyone blows off a little steam occasionally. Some of our top contributing members would have been banned years ago if this policy didn't work the way it does. We wouldn't want that to happen over an occasional grumpy day. That said, if it happens enough in a short period of time, it will result in an account's closure.

It's all about compromise and understanding, when both are reasonable.

What is reasonable about warning/infracting the same person for the same thing for how many times would you say, 20, 30 what? Because it has been 3 over the last 43 days, and this has been going on for years. I'm talking about this specific member. Give an estimate about how many times you or the other mods have warned/infracted this person. It'll be a big number and then how could you make a good argument that you haven't given him enough chances. He knows he shouldn't be posting it because he even says it in the post itself. But he does it anyway. Why do you think that is? Because rules are nothing if not enforced. He knows there is nobody here to handle it. He knows he can troll this forum as much as he wants.

"The two most recent occurrences you're referring to occurred over a month apart."

April 17
April 22
May 30

Stat wise, that would be about 26 infractions a year.

How many if we added them all up? It's ridiculous that you're actually making excuses for trolls instead handling it. He had a grumpy day, really.

Eric Lyon · May 31, 2016

JB Lions said:
What is reasonable about warning/infracting the same person for the same thing for how many times would you say, 20, 30 what?

Great question. I don't think you realize that you're arguing for many other members to be banned that you probably don't want to see banned.

JB Lions said:
Give an estimate about how many times you or the other mods have warned/infracted this person.

Most have expired. There aren't nearly as many as you seem to think. I've seen much worse for members who get their accounts closed due to exceeding the threshold.

JB Lions · May 31, 2016

Eric Lyon said:
Great question. I don't think you realize that you're arguing for many other members to be banned that you probably don't want to see banned.

I doubt it.

"There aren't nearly as many as you seem to think."

If you actually know, how many? You won't post the number because I bet if people see it, they will understand how ridiculous it is. How many times do you think you need to tell another adult not to do something specifically? Do you really think they keep doing it because they're "grumpy"?

We both know he'll keep doing it. So if you're ok with trolling, then let them troll. You've actually started threads asking for help moderating and stuff, why? You want people to waste their time over the same stuff over and over again? So you can give them yet another meaningless infraction that eventually just expires? Ridiculous system.

So be it.

ZapNano · May 31, 2016

Eric Lyon said:
Shane, we have a process that we follow for everyone. There are no feelings or bias involved with it.

Our process is strictly procedural, and it allows those who are willing to learn and abide by the rules the chance to do so.

@Eric Lyon, and some members on here they abused those buttons; dislike, report and likes.

namezest · May 31, 2016

Should there be a post for sake of argument that would show recently warned, banned etc. or should the name badge area show dislikes received and complaints received etc.? Also the complainant dislikes posted or complaints posted so everyone can see without having to have such discussions in the first place?
Just an idea..

Eric Lyon · May 31, 2016

JB Lions said:
If you actually know, how many?

It's not public information. We don't share non-public information to prove a point.
It doesn't matter what the number is. If it's too small of a number, you might argue that we are not issuing enough warnings. If it's too large, you might argue that there should be a ban after a certain number.

Arguing is a waste of time. You personally want the member banned, and the system in place is not serving that purpose for you. That's understandable. Feel free to offer constructive suggestions, and we'll be happy to consider them.

Keep in mind that those changes will likely affect you and many other members as well, so think them through thoroughly.

JB Lions · May 31, 2016

Eric Lyon said:
It's not public information. We don't share non-public information to prove a point.

It doesn't matter what the number is. If it's too small of a number, you might argue that we are not issuing enough warnings. If it's too large, you might argue that there should be a ban after a certain number.

Arguing is a waste of time. You personally want the member banned, and the system in place is not serving that purpose for you. That's understandable. Feel free to offer constructive suggestions, and we'll be happy to consider them.

Keep in mind that those changes will likely affect you and many other members as well, so think them through thoroughly.

A waste of time would be me trying to help you keep this forum clear of trolls because you don't do anything about it. I've been wasting my time. And how would it affect me? I don't break the rules. I haven't had an infraction in the last 6 years. I've only had 1 for linking to a gizmodo article my first year here, which was ridiculous.

"If it's too large, you might argue that there should be a ban after a certain number."

Most people would agree with that. Put up a poll if you don't believe that. Do you think warning/infracting somebody 20 times for the exact same thing should get banned? How do you think the poll would go? I would imagine most people would say yes. So now you're warning me, people trying to help and let the trolls go? Like I said, so be it. Let them troll, I won't report the stuff anymore, don't ask anymore.

"A poll for it sounds like another great idea."

You're the admin. You don't need a poll.

Eric Lyon · May 31, 2016

JB Lions said:
"If it's too large, you might argue that there should be a ban after a certain number."

Most people would agree with that. Put up a poll if you don't believe that. Do you think warning/infracting somebody 20 times of the exact incident is worthy of a ban.

I didn't say I disagree with that. I said it was a great question of what that number should be. A poll for it sounds like another great idea.

Everything is relative. A member with 10 warnings over a 10 year period is not the same as a member with 10 warnings in a single year. The latter would result in an account's closure.

N-A · May 31, 2016

https://xenforo.com/community/resources/post-ratings-taking-likes-to-the-next-level.410/

This is a plugin that I'm looking into for a XenForo community that I'm building. I like it in that "like" is a positive rating, while "disagree" can be neutral. Then, one may receive "dislikes" which would negatively impact an account. When a user continually receives dislikes, it would increase the green/red ratio on the bar below their name and it would be obvious who a troll is.

Yes, it can be exploited and people may leave "dislikes" as opposed to "disagree". But, couldn't the dislike system here be used the same way? And it's not, because management has clearly stated to not use it that way.

I believe a likes system such as this would be beneficial as nobody would want red under their name... and if they do, they obviously don't care about belonging to the community.

equity78 · May 31, 2016

JB Lions said:
What is reasonable about warning/infracting the same person for the same thing for how many times would you say, 20, 30 what? Because it has been 3 over the last 43 days, and this has been going on for years. I'm talking about this specific member. Give an estimate about how many times you or the other mods have warned/infracted this person. It'll be a big number and then how could you make a good argument that you haven't given him enough chances. He knows he shouldn't be posting it because he even says it in the post itself. But he does it anyway. Why do you think that is? Because rules are nothing if not enforced. He knows there is nobody here to handle it. He knows he can troll this forum as much as he wants.

"The two most recent occurrences you're referring to occurred over a month apart."

April 17
April 22
May 30

Stat wise, that would be about 26 infractions a year.

How many if we added them all up? It's ridiculous that you're actually making excuses for trolls instead handling it. He had a grumpy day, really.

I wish I knew who you were talking about.

ZapNano · May 31, 2016

Eric Lyon said:
It's not public information. We don't share non-public information to prove a point.

It doesn't matter what the number is. If it's too small of a number, you might argue that we are not issuing enough warnings. If it's too large, you might argue that there should be a ban after a certain number.

Arguing is a waste of time. You personally want the member banned, and the system in place is not serving that purpose for you. That's understandable. Feel free to offer constructive suggestions, and we'll be happy to consider them.

Keep in mind that those changes will likely affect you and many other members as well, so think them through thoroughly.

Just like I said, some members on here keep playing with those buttons; to the point it loses its meaning. I think there should be a button that keeps track of how many negatives reports or dislike that member sent. So this member can be look at. Just an opinion.

Silentptnr · May 31, 2016

I will only add that most good, regular, contributing members don't need to be held to a high standard of conduct because they are mostly professional already, and don't need a system with such high flexibility giving unprofessional or rude people so many chances. The system could, for the sake of the community, be less forgiving and it wouldn't affect good members.

Lastly, it is very important to listen to the regular members of a community because they really care. Everyone has their issues but based on what I'm reading maybe the system is a little too loose. The forum doesn't have to be so much about individual rights compared to being a quality community for domain related information.

The quality of this resource is paramount.

equity78 · May 31, 2016

The sysyem on ArsTechnica.com is my favorite for comments. Up +16 | +16 / 0 ) down.

ZapNano · May 31, 2016

"Lastly, it's important to listen to the regular members of a community because they really care" You mean, regularly members care about you? This statement seems unrealistic and debatible.

Silentptnr · May 31, 2016

ZapNano said:
"Lastly, it's important to listen to the regular members of a community because they really care" You mean, regularly members care about you? This statement seems unrealistic and debatible.

Care about being professional, friendly, and helpful. Care about the quality of the information about domain names on this forum.

ZapNano · May 31, 2016

Silentptnr said:
Care about being professional, friendly, and helpful. Care about the quality of the information about domain names on this forum.

Yes, this statement is an opinion, not the fact.

Michael Ehrhardt · May 31, 2016

Business is Business
Fun is Fun
Learn is Learn

For what is :

Like | Dislike | Thank |+ Quote Reply anyway ?

Who is the measure of all things ?

to be continued

N-A · May 31, 2016

equity78 said:
The sysyem on ArsTechnica.com is my favorite for comments. Up +16 | +16 / 0 ) down.

I believe that you can set this one up the same way as I've seen it in a couple different arrangements. The +/Neutral/- that you've seen, thumbs up and down (but doesn't account for neutral ratings) and the old style reputation bar.

Either way, one of these would be more effective than like/dislike that's currently in place as it's a stronger visible indicator of how members perceive other posters. If NamePros seeks help in moderation, wouldn't something like this be better as there is a record of where people "disliked" and how many different people have?

I mean, all I see is "Likes Received: 4,068" next to your name Raymond. How do I know that you aren't a toxic member with 10,000 dislikes? I would hope that there won't be a disparity like that before a ban is issued though... :P

DnEbook · May 31, 2016

Shane Bellone said:
I'm logging out.

I would say my nearly 5,000 likes suggests you're the minority here.

Either way, people like you have given me a reason to logout of a forum I've contributed to for a while.

I'm out.

But you said your goodbyes last week, why does this concern you so much? You are leaving aren't you?
~
Just wondering
~
Actually it is the non payers that peeve me off the most

ZapNano · May 31, 2016

If banning members rellies on people's opinion, rather than based on actual fact; then there is zero justification.

Start banning members

Account Closed

Nameplicity.comTop Member

StrongPunch.comTop Member

Nameplicity.comTop Member

Top Member

Scorpion Agency LLCTop Member

Top Member

Scorpion Agency LLCTop Member

Top Member

:(Top Member

Top Member

Scorpion Agency LLCTop Member

Top Member

Scorpion Agency LLCTop Member

Account Closed

Top Member

:(Top Member

Domains88.comTop Member

Top Member

:(Top Member

Domains88.comTop Member

:(Top Member

Top Member

Account Closed

DataGlasses.ComTop Member

:(Top Member

Similar threads

We're social

Pinned

Appreciation

Agreement