One of you guys should step up as the [censored] of MHNL

[KaneKungFu123]

just dont ban rv3r yet, his threads are too funny.

[mikech]

[ QUOTE ]
...ban users who post dumbass crap.

Anyway, just an idea that has imo worked quite well in OOT (someone can link to the relevant threads) and I think would really improve this forum dramatically.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
You might be right, Dr. S. I was not familiar with [censored] prior to the whole banning thing. I just thought it would be an interesting experiment is all. Maybe it would turn out well, maybe it would be a trainwreck, whatever. It's just OOT, does anyone really care?

[/ QUOTE ]
that's the thing, oot is like a locker room or something, it's just ppl shooting the [censored] anyway, so that kind of experiment in letting a mod go hog-wild and ban anybody is ok, cuz like you said, even if it turns out to be a disaster, who cares?

mhnl is an entirely different place, this is not a locker room, it's a classroom for a lot of ppl, myself included. on one hand, this means we need to keep the quality of discussion on this forum to a higher standard, but otoh, designating more mods and letting them go around banning ppl who post "dumbass crap" seems like it could be too arbitrary and severe. it's a delicate balance to strike but i think azk does a good job already without resorting to banning users.

[barongreenback]

Banning isn't the answer, esp. for something as inexact as stupidity.

Low quality posts aren't the problem but the volume of poor posts. What would work best is rationing the number of posts in MHNL for most people. Who decides who gets rationed and to what extent is the tricky bit here.

Regardless, limiting the number of new threads anyone can start in a set time frame would ,IMO ,be just what 2+2 needs. Maybe then people would reply to hands instead of starting a (similar) thread of their own.

It may turn out that newbies benefit the most from this even though their posting is most restricted. It is hard for unknowns to get themselves heard above the noise as it stands now. Ironically, often the only way to get a reply is to say something really stupid. (cf 'online poker is rigged' etc. threads)

James

[Ulysses]

Another good idea.

[HoldEmKillah]

Can I have the ability to ban myself since there are times that I make some seriously stupid posts?

[rwperu34]

[ QUOTE ]
Can I have the ability to ban myself since there are times that I make some seriously stupid posts?

[/ QUOTE ]

You always have that ability. Just don't post.

[mgsimpleton]

[ QUOTE ]
Banning isn't the answer, esp. for something as inexact as stupidity.

[/ QUOTE ]

while exact levels of stupidity may be inexact, there is certainly some line at which stupidity begins. while it may be difficult to objectively determine what is directly over the line and what falls short of crossing it, many things in this forum fall so far beyond the line that they could easily be banned. I'm not talking so extreme as to go on a banning spree, but I do think a moderator's power of banning should be used a little more liberally than it has in the past. I would suggest myself for the job but I'm waaaaay too judgemental.

[durrrr]

Can people be banned from just MHNL? If so i think a lot of the times this would be the way to go... and still only for a week or w/e.

[1800GAMBLER]

I vote for flawless_victory.

I also put garland and riche rich on my ban list.

[PinkSteel]

[ Disclaimer: SSNL noob, who should probably be banned from MHNL ]

If there were a "Recycle Bin" for banned posts, this idea would be right on. Some link somewhere on the board like, "You want to read the filtered trash, be our guest, it's right over here."

Keeps the moderator honest, as anyone can inspect and protest. But it still gives said moderator power of discretion, and if you trust him/her, still lets you read only the good stuff if that's what you want.

Complete disappearance of posts (books, films, people, races), however noble the intentions, will breed suspicion and paranoia in the end.