| |
|
Well, at least we can assume from this that it takes moderator votes from the forum rather than in general - at least, I have no banning request to vote on, so it looks like Temple moderators only.
Elsewhere, this comes across as a pretty good argument for not trusting moderators with banning powers. There has been no discussion with the wider board before the banning request was put in, so it seems that we have gone from an appearance of democratic discussion straight to an oligarchy making decisions without consultation. The thread starts by providing a series of links, but it actually doesn't do very much in the way of explaining why this behaviour is offensive, what damage it is doing to Barbelith, or indeed why, specifically, Aunt Beast thinks he should be banned - we only get:
a) only ever talks about a) adding up everything until he gets 23, or b) raping babies.
and
b) Sorry, but I kind of feel that anyone who thinks that a defence can be offered in this case is a fucking sap.
a) is actually untrue; although it has force as an expression of frustration, it does not pass the quality test for arguments for banning - that behaviour is identified, that that behaviour is exemplified and that the effects of that behaviour, and why they justify a ban, is explained. b) is irrelevant, and not really appreciated as a contribution to this discussion.
Of course, this is potentially now irrelevant, because a moderator excited by the power to ban has already popped in there and proposed the ban. I'm not imagining that quimper/darkmatter would ever contribute anything of interest, or at least of interest to me, but I'm not at all keen about the speed with which the ban button has been used to ignore anything resembling due process. |
|
|
