Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here  (Read 43866 times)

Julie Fern

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 27216
  • hillary clinton say "boo!"
    • View Profile
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #10 on: June 04, 2009, 01:52:11 PM »
Some things I'd like to see added:

Zero Content: replying to or creating a thread with nothing of substance; not offering significant advice or contributing to the conversation in any fashion.

Flame Wars (outside of Haterade)

Pornographic photos, or pornographic links without a warning of what it is.

Define "significant advice"

A specific answer to a question posed, or information on how to find the information needed through another source. Something other than misdirection, obfuscation, mockery, etc.

So, by your view, should one instance of dodging the question be enough or would this have to be a repeat offender in order to get banned?

That would have to be on a case-by-case basis. I'm sure there would have to be some balance set between productive and non-productive posting. And if someone's only intention is to be a jerk to other posters, that should become readily apparent.

And, can someone give me an explanation of stuff like this? It appears to be a very long thread filled with copying and pasting, or at best paraphrasing, other websites. Not saying it should be ban-worthy, just wondering what the point is.

point is you not have read it.

unless from one poster, it serious discussion.

and, even if can prove plagiarism:  we to ban for that, too?

julie more concerned about same thing--especially something overtly cut and pasted--put into several nongermane threads.  blueidiot like do that.  it very dull.

Julie Fern

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 27216
  • hillary clinton say "boo!"
    • View Profile
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #11 on: June 04, 2009, 02:26:20 PM »
ok, julie stand corrected.  but, then, there not seem much point your point either.  actually, there plenty in lsd have no particular point.  julie, in particular, like whimsy--ok, somewhat provocative whimsy, but whimsy nonetheless.

we can post all grounds for banning we want, but moderators have consider what reasonably be administered.  right now, moderation not always seem all that consistent.  moderation in general, especially banning, should be rather limited.

Miss P

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 21337
    • View Profile
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #12 on: June 04, 2009, 03:37:23 PM »
I think banning should be a last resort.  There are lots of other levels of moderation: post-deletion (especially appropriate in the case of truly obscene posts or disclosure of personal information), private admonishment, public admonishment, moving or combining threads (including moving to the Haterade), and temporary suspension.  In most cases, a poster should be warned (perhaps multiple times) before any punishment involving suspension or termination of an account or access from a given IP address.

And yes, moderation is inconsistent.  There are several reasons for this, including:
1. We have different moderators, and LSD Andrew gives them very little guidance, so they may be applying different standards;
2. There is not enough coverage for the entire discussion board;
3. Moderators therefore rely on reports from other posters to learn of offensive or otherwise objectionable posts; and
4. No one knows the grounds for various types of moderation (if there are any uniform standards), so reports are likely arbitrary and inconsistent.

Finally, I want to thank Sands and EC for their service to the LAW SCHOOL DISCUSSION board.  This place is much better because of all that you do.  Please don't take any of my comments above or past criticism as a lack of appreciation for your service.
That's cool how you referenced a case.

Quote from: archival
I'm so far from the end of my tether right now that I reckon I could knit myself some socks with the slack.

Miss P

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 21337
    • View Profile
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #13 on: June 04, 2009, 04:09:10 PM »
Sounds good to me, P. I think the way things have been handled is fine, but we need it more often and more consistently. And in some cases, just more of it, sooner.

I agree!
That's cool how you referenced a case.

Quote from: archival
I'm so far from the end of my tether right now that I reckon I could knit myself some socks with the slack.

UnbiasedObserver

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2014
    • View Profile
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #14 on: June 04, 2009, 04:59:47 PM »
I have a few points/comments to make:

1) I want to thank all of the moderators here.  You are awesome.

2) I agree with Miss P that banning should only be used as a last resort.

3) I still strongly voice my objection that it seems that Pilofolo was banned because of a silly comment to a moderator whether that moderator put "lawschooldiscussion monitor" (or something to that effect) on his resume.

While it is true that Pilofolo had a "rap sheet," the moderator's comments in reaction to Pilofolo's post leads me to this conclusion.  Maybe I'm wrong, and correct me if this is so. 

I think moderators should: a) avoid the risk of becoming partial and letting their emotions get the best of him/her, as this seems to be happening in that specific instance; b) perhaps make a thread where the community knows that someone is banned, and discuss it? (I have no problems, however, with temporary or permanent bans if there are "serious" offenses against a person/the forum.)


Julie Fern

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 27216
  • hillary clinton say "boo!"
    • View Profile
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #15 on: June 04, 2009, 05:00:59 PM »
I think the moderation seems inconsistent because of inconsistent coverage by moderators. There are what, two of them, Sands and EarlCat? And I disagree that moderation and banning should be limited. Moderation and banning have been limited in the past, and has only served to change LSD from a rather pleasant forum to a mini-Autoadmit at times. It took an act of God to get rid of wiimote, and I would say that the majority of people who were here at the time would say that was richly deserved and much longer in coming than it should've been.

you know very little of this site's ancient history.  believe julie, it tame now.  not everything can be tightly controlled, especally people's words.  nor should they be.

Matthies

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 5988
    • View Profile
    • Tell me where you are going to school and you get a cat!
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #16 on: June 04, 2009, 05:37:18 PM »
Some things I'd like to see added:

Zero Content: replying to or creating a thread with nothing of substance; not offering significant advice or contributing to the conversation in any fashion.

Flame Wars (outside of Haterade)

Pornographic photos, or pornographic links without a warning of what it is.

Define "significant advice"

A specific answer to a question posed, or information on how to find the information needed through another source. Something other than misdirection, obfuscation, mockery, etc.

So, by your view, should one instance of dodging the question be enough or would this have to be a repeat offender in order to get banned?

That would have to be on a case-by-case basis. I'm sure there would have to be some balance set between productive and non-productive posting. And if someone's only intention is to be a jerk to other posters, that should become readily apparent.

And, can someone give me an explanation of stuff like this? It appears to be a very long thread filled with copying and pasting, or at best paraphrasing, other websites. Not saying it should be ban-worthy, just wondering what the point is.

point is you not have read it.

unless from one poster, it serious discussion.

and, even if can prove plagiarism:  we to ban for that, too?

julie more concerned about same thing--especially something overtly cut and pasted--put into several nongermane threads.  blueidiot like do that.  it very dull.

It is one poster, creating alts to carry on a conversation with him/her self of stuff copy pasted from the net, its law school discussion not parionded synchofrentic discussion.
*In clinical studies, Matthies was well tolerated, but women who are pregnant, nursing or might become pregnant should not take or handle Matthies due to a rare, but serious side effect called him having to make child support payments.

Julie Fern

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 27216
  • hillary clinton say "boo!"
    • View Profile
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #17 on: June 04, 2009, 06:13:48 PM »
I think the moderation seems inconsistent because of inconsistent coverage by moderators. There are what, two of them, Sands and EarlCat? And I disagree that moderation and banning should be limited. Moderation and banning have been limited in the past, and has only served to change LSD from a rather pleasant forum to a mini-Autoadmit at times. It took an act of God to get rid of wiimote, and I would say that the majority of people who were here at the time would say that was richly deserved and much longer in coming than it should've been.

you know very little of this site's ancient history. believe julie, it tame now. not everything can be tightly controlled, especally people's words. nor should they be.

Yeah, you've got almost 2 years on me, Jules. So, while I may not have all the experience you have, I'm hardly a spring chicken by this board's standards, and I can say that it was quite different and has taken a downturn in the 3-years-plus since I arrived. And I'm not trying to tightly control people's words, but their actions. It can be done, even on a vastly more busy board than this--on the order of 30,000 posters logged on at any given moment, and make for a more pleasant environment.

wow...what you still doing here?  and those two years you missed doozies.  not know wiimote, but he sound like extreme case;  julie not know.

and let's get this straight:  you show up, and lsd traffic nosedive?  nooooooooo!

Julie Fern

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 27216
  • hillary clinton say "boo!"
    • View Profile
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #18 on: June 04, 2009, 06:18:09 PM »
Some things I'd like to see added:

Zero Content: replying to or creating a thread with nothing of substance; not offering significant advice or contributing to the conversation in any fashion.

Flame Wars (outside of Haterade)

Pornographic photos, or pornographic links without a warning of what it is.

Define "significant advice"

A specific answer to a question posed, or information on how to find the information needed through another source. Something other than misdirection, obfuscation, mockery, etc.

So, by your view, should one instance of dodging the question be enough or would this have to be a repeat offender in order to get banned?

That would have to be on a case-by-case basis. I'm sure there would have to be some balance set between productive and non-productive posting. And if someone's only intention is to be a jerk to other posters, that should become readily apparent.

And, can someone give me an explanation of stuff like this? It appears to be a very long thread filled with copying and pasting, or at best paraphrasing, other websites. Not saying it should be ban-worthy, just wondering what the point is.

point is you not have read it.

unless from one poster, it serious discussion.

and, even if can prove plagiarism: we to ban for that, too?

julie more concerned about same thing--especially something overtly cut and pasted--put into several nongermane threads. blueidiot like do that. it very dull.

It is one poster, creating alts to carry on a conversation with him/her self of stuff copy pasted from the net, its law school discussion not parionded synchofrentic discussion.

no.  that not be fun acronym at all.

Burning Sands, Esq.

  • Global Moderator
  • LSD Obsessed
  • ****
  • Posts: 7072
  • Yes We Kan-sas!!!
    • View Profile
Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« Reply #19 on: June 04, 2009, 08:10:21 PM »

And I wouldn't say that the traffic turned down sharply when I arrived. But I will say that the quality of posters took a nosedive a couple years ago (not quality of content, but quality of contribution), followed by a downturn in board activity. Causation? No telling, but I wouldn't doubt it. Things did improve for a while after EarlCat came on-board as a mod, but then it just went back to the same old BS.

Expand on that observation if you wouldn't mind.  I've been on the board for a number of years myself and have noticed a significant downturn in board activity as well.  You're saying it went back up when there was visible moderation?


@ Everybody else, the suggestions look great so far. Keep them coming.
"A lawyer's either a social engineer or a parasite on society. A social engineer is a highly skilled...lawyer who understands the Constitution of the U.S. and knows how to explore its uses in the solving of problems of local communities and in bettering [our] conditions."
Charles H. Houston