SANParks.org Forums

WOW 3 mods reply - you obviously have nothing better to do so -
Bert start the fire
Jen makes the salad
DB gets the pap going
And I will be there shortly

(Sorry couldn't resist)

I voted no as I feel the possibility for speculation is too great. I do understand the people saying yes point of view. Interesting poll.

As always a clear yes or no is difficult for me.

I would say yes, if..........etc.
And no, if..................etc.

Will think about it

I voted yes, but I dont think there needs to be a thread or topic containing banned users, we also dont need to know why the user was banned.

All that you need to see is where it says offline or online under your avatar it should say banned, I have seen that in many a forum I have been a member of.

I have voted No, because I think those people feel bad enough being banned, and not being able to explain their sides of the story.

This is something one should keep in mind before voting: banned members are banned and as such not able to login to the forums. In many cases not even able to see the forums. So they will not be able to give their side of the story. As it is not allowed to post for banned members others are unable to do it either.

This will more be like a little announcement such as:

Banned permanently due to breaking rule X: DuQues
Banned for a month (ending on 2 September 2011) due to breaking rule X: bert

If there is only going to be partial information, I am going to vote NO.

Thank you team Mods...

I totally agree to what dikdikkie said. Name and shame might not be the right way to go about things. Malicious intent of banned members or not, blacklisting people might mean loss of public dignity. Privacy as a set of rights over the control of one's image, name, and reputation, and over the public disclosure of information about oneself is an aspect of personal dignity of all forum members, wrong doers included.

There is an actual shame for banned users. Most users are using nicknames, but there are many other members and readers on the forum who know the real name and person behind.

At least the banned member has to agree before he/she appears on a ban list.
Furthermore a in public manner banned member should be allowed to state his case and to explain why he/she thinks the ban was unjustified, if he/she feels that he/she was treated unfairly.

That is always possible (and happens) via a mail to E-commerce.

I mean to state the case on the forum, DuQues

It happens, yes! You expose your reasons to why you think that the ban/warning is unfair and if you do not get an answer you can just go and

I agree with Toko.
Bans should be able to be challenged in the open.

then there isn't the same shame. Because members will make up their own mind if the ban is justified in which case there isn't shame, and if it is justified there will be shame.
The fact that every ban brings shame assumes every ban is just.

Many may get banned because they choose to “fight” for something that they believe in and I don’t see any shame in that.

Yes Bushcraft, but not all. We probably see things in the same way +/-, but still vote differently

You could give a banned member 3 days after the ban to tell their side of the story. Just one post without starting a new discussion and if this post is against any rules again you can easily delete it.
just a question of interest: if a member does get banned for a month does he/she have no chance to contact one of the mods because they can't login? Does a banned member have any chance to reply, answer or ask questions?