VEGANGELICA

Hi Tore,

Thanks for starting this thread. I voted that I feel the moderators are doing a good job, but I see areas where there could be improvement:
(1) Increase consistency and reduce bias.
(2) Perhaps involve the community in decisions about permanent banning by either giving a banned person a chance to work off bannings or allow those who were hurt by the person's behavior to come to that person's defense.

First, I want to say I appreciate all you moderators for doing your (non-paid) jobs for the MB site for the benefit of all of us and for music. I feel moderators are almost always doing a good job trying to stop people from making personal insults (which are different than insulting ideas or views). I agree with this philosophy of behavior and so the rules make me feel quite safe on the site. It is nice to feel there are a bunch of benevolent volunteer "police" trying to make sure we play nice.

I don't want to make more work for moderators by expecting them to try to be more consistent by handing out infractions for every little transgression, especially since sometimes it is still a judgement call as to whether someone really put down another person "personally" or not, or plugged her/his own stuff more than is considered desirable. I feel the temporary banning system works well as is, and I think the moderators are doing a good job of weeding out new posters who appear, quite obviously, to not have music discussion and a desire for being part of an online community as high priorities. My main concern is with permanent banning.

There are a few times when I have seen moderators say things that I view as being nasty...or they respond personally to a criticism of their actions...without anyone moderating the moderators. I am a little afraid of some of the moderators...which is not a good sign. I've felt that some of the moderators do not deal with each other as harshly as they would with a non-moderator member. I have seen one instance when it felt like a few moderators were ganging up on someone because they didn't appear to like him. Their verbal behavior toward him in the threads appeared to be different when compared to their treatment of someone whom they did like who had, nevertheless, also put people down personally (and thus was temporarily banned).

I have some suggestions for how to handle permanent banning. I am thinking now of permanent banning due mostly to a person making personal attacks on others. Why am I interested in permanent banning? I am troubled when a long-standing member of the community is banned. Permanent banning is the equivalent of life in jail in the real world, though to me it feels more like capital punishment (which I oppose) since the permabanned person is permantly shunned, gone forever from the community. Ideally, in the real world, jail time (banning) is supposed to protect the public but also give the jailed (banned) person a time to change, a method for learning to do so, and something that the person can do to make up for the infraction. I wish there were a way on MB for people who are in danger of permanent banning to reduce their sentences by somehow doing something to make up for the infractions, or by having others (non-moderators) come to their defense. Currently, the government system at MB is a benevolent dictatorship (that listens to input), which makes running the site efficient, but at the risk of a greater chance of injustice toward a member. Ideally, any government would have some sort of check-and-balance system and a method for correcting possible errors on the part of the leadership.

SUGGESTION 1: Perhaps there could be a member-based way to veto a perma-banning, such as by posting a "jury" thread on behalf of a member whom moderators want to permaban, and if enough people (a critical mass) say to keep the person in the community, then the permanent ban gets reduced to a temporary ban. This would allow all those who like and value that person to come to her/his defense. Maybe if enough people value that person in the community, then she/he could have a permanent ban reduced to a temporary ban.

As you know, when I've seen temporary bannings in the past that I feared had to do with me, I've written in to you in defense of the person. I hate to think that a permanent ban occurred partly due to a temporary ban perhaps given to someone for behavior for which I forgive the person. Let's say there were a "jury" thread about permabanning someone and whether s/he should be permanbanned. If I wrote in and said, "S/he and I discussed her/his transgression against me and I forgive her/him," then I think it would be good to strike off one of the temporary bans from the total used to determine if the person gets permanently banned.

DRAWBACK to my suggestion 1: One wants to respect and protect those who have been hurt (called mean names, etc.). It isn't fair to let an individual be attacked personally and not have the attacker brought fully "to justice" just because many people like the attacker. In other words, no one should be "let off the hook" completely. However, I completely support subtracting temporary bans from the total (used to determine if someone gets a permanent ban) especially if the "accused" has sorted things out with the person s/he verbally attacked.

SUGGESTION 2: Provide for some sort of community service that a banned member can perform in order to get back in good standing more quickly. Let's say someone has received a temporary ban or is, based on the number of tempbans, supposed to be permanently banned. Maybe there could be some sort of "community service" thread where banned members can do some sort of community service to have the length of the ban reduced, or the permanent ban reduced to a temporary ban? Perhaps write a brief essay on some music group, ha ha!

Ideally, of course, people would apologize to those they attacked personally, or apologize for an action, and actually feel remorse and understand why they were called out on their behavior...but one can't force emotions, and no one wants hollow apologies. The "community service" idea might be a way to at least show the person is willing to try to compensate for an infraction. Eh...I know this idea would be hard to implement.

YOUR SUGGESTION: I do think that, at the very least, it would help people understand why someone is being banned if there is a public "MB courtroom" thread that provides information (but not discussion...discussion could be in a "Jury" thread! ). An "MB courtroom" thread would mirror real life in that we (the public) at least get to hear most facts in most court cases (sometimes after the fact). As long as it is stated in the MB rules that this is how misbehaviors are handled, I feel it would be fair to have an "MB courtroom" thread to list what behaviors on the threads were considered ban-worthy ("temporary bans given to So-and-So for posts x, y, and z). Since everything we post in threads is public, there would be no violation of privacy by describing exactly why a person received a warning or a ban...and it could help clarify what behaviors are discouraged on MB, so that it is all out in the open. People will have very clear examples of what *not* to say in their posts.

One reason this topic is especially on my mind is that I miss someone who was permanently banned. I felt he had a wealth of musical knowledge that I saw him share with others in the music forums. And, he actually read my vegan songs, which he hated, but at least he told me why! Sometimes I saw him making personal attacks on others and so I understood his temporary bannings. I felt, though, with regards to me he *had* been controlling himself and critiquing only my songs and not making put-downs of me, personally.

Then, before he was permabanned, I saw what I would describe as moderators taunting him in some threads...taunting him that they were going to ban him permanently soon. In retrospect, I should have stepped in then, in the thread, to challenge that moderator behavior by simply saying that the moderators' behavior was scaring me and I felt the person had valid points. I hoped they were joking about the permanent banning that was being threatened.

Several days later, though, I found out this individual *was* permanently banned, and I was sad. Although I know I do not see all that goes on (in private messages) between the member who is misbehaving and the moderators, I felt his loss was overall a loss to the community.

After his permabanning, I read in the shout box the words of a moderator who said s/he was delighted about the banning, and that it felt good to do it, which saddened me more. (The shoutbox was how I learned about the permanent banning.) This situation is what inspired me to write about the issue of how permanent bans are given on MB and how they might be reduced to temporary bans.

Thanks for asking for feedback, Tore.

--Erica

__________________