Banned Member
Hey, we had a senior member banned. This isn't a flame or anything just wondering what happened exactly. Not trying to open a can of worms..I just think it's better to know what goes on especially since who knows I could be gone for posting this?
Comments
I suspect that Scotty or Sloth had a very good reason.
I don't, however, expect either of them to reply to this thread. If either of them felt that BBC should be banned, then they're entitled to go ahead and ban him, without feeling obliged to explain anything to any of us. I'm not trying to belittle you for asking, Micr0be, at all... just saying that the people who run this site can do pretty much whatever they feel is best.
I'm sorry I can't give you any more info. I don't have any. But at the same time, like I said, I don't think any of us should expect a reason or an explanation. If one is offered, so be it, but it's not a mod or admin's job to explain, or justify, his actions.
Regards,
all_aces
I was the one who banned BBC Z. This is a temporary ban lasting one week.
For some time now, BBC Z has been writing posts which I consider to be conveying a bad attitude. I consider several of his posts to be derogatory and demeaning to other forum users.
The content of the posts is not the issue. Certainly no-one is under any obligation to contribute something positive to the forum; however, frquently diminishing other people's experiences is too much of a negative contribution to go ignored.
I have considered a permanent ban in this case. However, I do not take this kind of decision lightly, and I feel that such a measure is unwarranted at this time.
To address some of Micr0be's comments:
The designation "Senior Member" is automatically given when a user reaches a certain number of posts. Being a Senior Member implies no special status otherwise. (The only special designations are Administrator and Moderator.)
To re-iterate the points all_aces has brought up, no mod or admin is expected to explain his/her actions. This is a moderated forum. From time to time, the mods and admin are likely to make decisions that some do not agree with. Many decisions are based on judgements and opinions rather than facts, and some decisions are difficult.
Explaining all af the day-to-day mod/admin decisions would simply too cumbersome. I've personally deleted dozens (probably over 100) posts (mostly improper advertising) and banned about 10 users (again, mostly because of improper advertising), rarely with any explanation. In this particular case, I felt I should share some of my thoughts on the decision.
ScottyZ
I believe that Microbe's point was that I made around 260 posts when banned and had nothing to imply that I was anything special... I'd love for you to take the time to actually read all the posts I've made around here. While you may recall the negative (as most people would) I believe there are around 5 times the negative posts in positive ones.
Au contraire.. I believe that in order to foster a sense of community, a moderator who takes as drastic a step as banning a member who contribues valuable information to the community is responsible to provide a clear non-biased reason for banning said memeber. Regardless of the other things (spam et all) that you have to do. Giving no reason would just be cowardace.
I know that a lot of members of this forum have full time jobs that comprise far more complicated tasks than forum modertation. Care to explain exactly in explicit detail what you feel is so cumbersome?
Finally Scotty.. I would like you to admit to this forum that you had ZERO plan to re-instate me at any point to this forum. I believe that it was all_aces post that said he would not ban me that caused you to retract from your initial position. When I was banned, I was given NO warning and NO reason. I simply could not log in any more. Where is the one week disclosed?
My question to the forum. Is this kind of behavior from a moderator acceptable? I admit, I may cut my responses short and at times I can appear condesensing and acute, but I think for every instance of this behaviour, I've given five times that in good useful information. Wheter it be an alternative view of hand history or explainations of situations that I've enounted through my own play. Is it fair that because Scotty and I have differing opinions that I should lose my voice? Is that the type of community we want to create?
If thats the kind of place you want pokerforum to be. I'm all for it. I'll leave and never post here again. I believe that if you want a real community, you need the sugarly sweet posts (Oh, you didnt play 72o so bad) with some of the more negative posts (Damn that was a bad play) that people like me can post.
Lets look at my track record since Scotty likes to imply that I'm useless.. I've had many a post where my opinion brought up real discussion (aka JJ tourney preflop) and I've had posts where I disagreed with the masses (aka Aces trivia post). In the positive instances, we had a real discourse about alternative ways to play a hand which I think could enrich a players game. In the perceived negative, I had a beef with aces use of the forum. I had two posts where I was critial and NEVER have EVER degenerated a thread to a meaninginless flame war. I spoke my point and let the rest go.
Is decenting opinion allow on this forum? Aces and I have had disagreements and I dont believe there is any harbourded angst. I believe I contribue to the ongoing progession of this forum so that it is better than it was the day before.
Is it fair for Scotty to restrict my voice based on personal feelings? I believe this is abuse of power.
That last question goes to the forum. Do you want this to be a place where you hear the answers you want to hear or do you want this to be a place where you can hear the truth? Where you can head the answers that will improve your game? Example: garro's 97s all-in call when he was against top pair. I told him that his call was crap while he believed his call was great. Which helped more.. hearing that his call was good EXCEPT <reason> or someone saying 'Hey, that call was crap, what were you thinking?' and then explaining?
Once again, I could die a happy man if Scotty would admit to this forum that my ban was indeed permanent and that only changed to '1 week' because of all_aces. If Scotty could admit to it, I would leave this forum happy.
As my final point. I pity the person who next runs into Scotty's misfavour. You will get banned just like I did. You wil have no recourse and you will be given no reason as to why such action was taked against you. So beforewarned: Dissention is not tolerated here.
If anyone agrees with any point I've made, I would appreciate a response in this thread.
You got banned. Big deal. This is a commercial website. Bottom line: It's here to make money and the guys that run it can do whatever they see fit to get to that goal. Piss them off and you are gonna get kicked out. Unfortunately, there is no cost to join so getting kicked out is no big deal. It's not a very big stick they wield.
I haven't been a member here that long. But all the posts I have seen of yours since then have been negative. Not just negative but generally rude to others. I joined because I wanted to become a better poker player. People can't learn if they are always being called idiots.
Ever heard of Carolyn Parrish? She is from Mississauga, too. It is not so much what you say but the way you say it. Go ahead and criticize someone's play. But don't just say 'you are stupid'. Explain why the play is poor. Then maybe they can get some value from this site and from you. Maybe you have done that in the past. I apologize that I haven't been here long enough to vouch for that. I'd invite others to speak up if that is the case.
Of course there is room for dissent here. That's what a forum is all about. It is through the discussion of different viewpoints we learn. But when you attack others, you lessen the likelihood of discussion. When that starts to happen it lowers the value of the site to others, visitors drop and advertising revenue falls. I fully support Scotty's right to boot guys who do this. I only wish he had a bigger stick.
I found it awfully ironic that you complained about others' posts as 'bragging' yet all of your posts I have seen pretty much say 'look how much smarter I am than you'. Even this one is aimed at making Scotty look bad. There are ways to respectfully disagree with someone.
As far as the 'banning' function goes, it is pretty useless. (How hard is it to start another account? It's FREE!!! And virtually anonymous. These guys should charge a nominal fee via credit card so they would know who the members are. Then banning would be more effective. Of course then membership would drop. Less discussion. Less value. It's a fine line.)
From my perspective, I'd like to see a 'shunning' function, where individual members could elect to not even see posts by specified members. Or a 'rating' function where you could give a post a '+' or a '-' with a 'filter' function to only look at the posts others have deemed 'worthy'.
I'd appreciate hearing other member's opinions on this.
I participate in quite a few forums around the web, some as a member and some just to browse anonymously.
From what I have seen new forums with low traffic are a dime a dozen and offer very little value until the membership goes up. The next phase (and the one I think this forum is in) is when a sufficient number of people (~>200) with a similar interest are participating the value of the posts goes sky high and there is little stomach for dissension. People generally want good discussion in a mature manner.
The next phase is when a few thousand members join in and the general level of discussion is pretty good but is much more impersonal then the previous stage. This is a slippery slope. If it keeps growing it could become a victim of its own success like slashdot…
….which brings me to the >>>huge<<< forums like slashdot. For those not familiar with slashdot it is a technical forum that discusses the tech news articles of the day. There are like a million members and after a link to an article is posted everybody chimes in with their 2 cents. These forums are so huge they've had to institute a moderator point system which filters out the trash\flames\trolls etc etc etc. The intended effect is for the cream to rise to the top. The usual outcome is a bunch of people trying to be witty in order to bring up their rating (karma whoring). No useful discussion takes place anymore because posts are pretty much one person monologues with no replies. As you drill down into the lower scored posts you can sometimes trip on something very useful but if you reply it is doubtful anyone will see it as most people filter anything moderated less then a 5. (moderation goes from -1 to 5).
You do not want Pokerforum.ca to become like Slashdot or >>>gasp<<< RGP. I think this forum is well on pace to outgrow the cozy discussion level that we see here today. So there will be more and more instances where the moderators have to make tough decisions. Do we want this to remain a truly Canadian forum with lower membership and useful discussion or do we want to become RGP. Scotty is the only one that has a right to make that decision as he assumes all the risk and cost of the forum and the rest of us are a bunch of leachers enjoying the free ride. I for one would like it to remain this way so I support whatever the moderators think is right. I’m not big on censorship but this is not a democracy either. You see… I am paying >>>NOTHING<<< for this and have no right to expect it to meet my demands. If I don’t like it I am free to f*** off and go elsewhere. If members expect to mold the shape of this forum then they should be ready to open their wallets and assume some of the risk. Then Scotty can start making decisions by committee if he chooses to go that way.
Until then I bow to our all-mighty moderator overlords ( ) because moderating is a tedious thankless task that requires diligence day in and day out. Without moderation we become RGP, a few useful posts drowning is a cesspool of ignorant, rude and offtopic waste.
Just one comment: Scotty isn't the only only. As far as I know, he is not the owner of the site. From that perspective, he deserves even more kudos for all the work he does.
I stand corrected. I assumed he was. Please subsitute Scotty for owners.
stp
I imagine this is the problem a lot of people have with BBC's posts.
'Does he make good points? Who knows? The tone he used to express those points has pissed me off to the point where I can't tell if they're good or not!'
One other issue is that there are a lot of people who are new to the game who read this forum, but do not post. Their reasons for choosing not to post are probably numerous, but one of them may be that they're afraid of looking foolish. BBC's posts--while usually accurate in their analysis--do nothing to encourage new people to post here. Quite the opposite, and that is a very big problem.
ScottyZ is the single most valuable resource this forum has, and not just as a moderator. If someone has a question, no matter how simple or complex, he will answer it, and if he can't answer it, he'll point the person to a resource that can. Furthermore, he does it in such a way as to not make the poster look stupid. There are a lot of relatively new players on this forum, and having someone here who is able to deal with basic and advanced problems alike in a thoughtful, courteous manner is GOLD. It's a gift that very few people have.
Personally, I think it's good to have dissenting voices, like BBC's. They encourage debate, and thought, and that's a good thing. I just think that his points would be stronger if they were made in more constructive ways than:
and
and
And finally, when I made my original post in this thread I had no idea that the ban was temporary, and I wasn't trying to 'influence' Scotty with anything I wrote. You're right that I have no harboured resentment towards you BBC--I'm a guy, and in general, I'm able to completely forget about being mad if you give me like 5 minutes--but I wasn't trying to imply that Scotty 'better have a good reason' to ban you. I see now how it could appear as though that was what I was trying to say, but it wasn't. If Scotty thinks it's in the best interests of the posters on this forum--and the people who are considering posting--to ban someone, I totally support him. He's shown nothing but good judgement in the past, so who am I to argue?
Regards,
all_aces
ps: as an aside, regarding this point LOL pkrfce9, I used to think that too. However, I think--although I am not certain--that when someone gets banned it is their IP address--not their username--that is blocked, as well as the IP addresses of any other computers they've used to post here, as well. Again, I could be wrong, but I think that's probably the case.
I had been a long time 2+2 member/poster and RGP poster. Both of those places were great places to exchange ideas/views and thoughts. Unfortnately, RGP has become a horrible place to visit. On every post I make there's always someone respondind and telling how dumb I am. It doesn't matter what I post. The advice/information I get does not warrant the bad taste it leaves behind.
Now 2+2 is a much better place. However, even there it's become a place with "pack" mentalilty and people who worship slansky. While I admire his work, some of his views are very narrow and he doesn't invite different thinking. And, it's become a very closed group -- closed in the sense that they don't allow new thinking.
I joined this place and instantly enjoyed posting. I was amazed that people respected my opinions even if they disagreed. There's good discussion, and the moderators encourage opposing views. I don't see anyone shutting down any line of thought. Only typical Canadian challenges like "have you thought about...", or "I mean no disrespect to you...", or "I know you were asking Dave, but I thought I would provide some feedback". It is so freaking refreshing!
I trully believe the moderators here are making this a good place to visit, and exchange information. Please keep up the great work -- this will evolve to the premier place for Canadian poker players.
Yes, IP's are tracked for each member in the VBulletin software running this forum. (I'm an admin on a non-poker related forum) The only way to get around this, is to sign up with a different service provider and get a different IP address.
On the issue of sites growing too large, and going through the inevitable pains that can bring, the ONLY control we have is the Mods and Admins and the forum rules. If they have control, the place stays fun. I joined a site years ago when it was just starting up, as a bunch of us had lost our other virtual home when a different one had closed down. When I joined we had about 300 members or so. Almost 2 years later, I'm now an admin there and we have over 13,000 members. And we don't take shit from anyone. For what it's worth, I think I'll stay here. It has great potential. .02
In regards to "banning", I think we forget and take for granted that this service is provided free of charge. Your membership here should be taken as a privilege and not a right. Any feedback you provide should take account that the people visiting this board are at all different levels of play. Most come here to LEARN more about the game. Feedback is a tool used to teach, not to belittle. I personally feel that the moderators and administrators of this site have done an excellent job in creating a sense of community; which is the purpose of all forums. If you (by "you" I mean any member) are here to impose a negative presence on this board, it is within the rights and the duty of the moderators to revoke your membership.
Let's get back to poker.
Cheers.
You've completely missed the point.
Most of my replies are like that! The problem I see is that everyone likes to harp on the negative and dismiss the positive.
I was banned for 1 week, without even as much courtesy as a simple warning, for 4 bad posts after contribuing 230+ to the betterment of this forum. THAT'S why I'm disappointed with Scotty.
I like your posts, USUALLY, because you often look at things quite different from me. What I don't like is your occational but stupid remarks/overtones in your posts. I deffinitely do not think this forum is for pussy footing around but we do not have to degrade one another.
As for Scotty appologizing I think that would be rediculous!!! You got banned for posting what he thought was inappriote. If you don't aggree then don't post any more. I for one enjoy having different points of view here (and your's are usually different) but I do not want to see it come at the costs of losing current and/or future posters.