SANParks.org Forums

Ecojunkie, I think you've made a good point there. I've never seen any concern shown about posting photographs of people breaking rules. "What's good for the goose ....."

I cannot think what privacy laws will have any effect here. If you post on something on an open website, you tell the world what you think and thereby make yourself vulnerable to any negative comment from whosoever. But, if you post something which does not conform to the rules laid down by the site, then you must not complain if your posts are removed or, you are banned. To post something is not a right but a privilege.

Someone mentioned probable legal action if your name and the reason for your banning are mentioned, but what are the legal consequences? If someone says to me "Rooies, you are a bloody fool", how have my fama and dignitas been affected? I post under a username and the rest of the world doesn't know who the accuser is referring to. So will this effect my standing in the community? Will my neighbor tell me that he will not look after my house during the Christmas season because I misbehaved on the SANParks forum? Definitely not.

I therefor see no problem if the following is posted "BANNED FOR LIFE. Rooies has repeatedly transgressed rule 123, despite 7 warnings, and he is now part of the the history of this forum"

Rooies, now that is straight talk.

Members are not banned to bring shame. When a member is banned, only the moderators, Admin and the banned member knows about it. It only becomes embarrassing when it is posted on open forum for the whole world to read and that is never the doing of the mods or Admin.

Scenario - Bert gets banned (sorry Bert your name came up 1st) for breaking rule xyz. His posts gets edited by the mods, just doing their job. I come along and read that Bert was banned and
then see his post was edited. Or change the scenario - the post is still there. My opinion the post did not break the rules. Chill room here we come, again.... Another scathing attack on the mods for what I believe to be an injustice.

Do you really think that will solve the problem? Won't it just create opportunity for unhappiness and more hot debates like the 1 last week. I do not believe that is the way to go, I might be wrong but that is my opinion.

But the point is LVB, members are not banned for one post breaking the rules, they are banned because they consistently and over a period of time, break the rules to which they agreed to abide by when they joined the forum.

I think whenever a member gets banned there will be confusion no matter if the name gets published or not. If it gets published some members may be confused because they don't understand why, if the name doesn't get published other members may be confused because pm's to this member don't get through or they get told that the requested name doesn't exist..
And for the shame: in my opinion nobody has to be ashamed for the things other people do, only for the things you do yourself. In other words, a member could be ashamed because of his own posts but not because he was banned of the forum.
I think as an information for the other forumites it would be better to publish the names, maybe there would be less debates and rumours then.

Agreed and understood, but by publishing people won't know about the other indiscretions by the banned member and that is another point where the mods will then open themselves to attack. All the information will not be available to everybody.

Quite correct. As has been the case all along. The mods never tell their side so members are not aware of what posts have been edited over the years, how many times a member has been written to (not even warned, just written to) etc etc. At the moment, and in the past, the members get to hear only one side of the story, and I would guess, not always a very accurate account of happenings.

Anyone who has been following certain threads would more or less have an idea why a fellow forumite suddenly fell away, whether by choice or by being banned. If you are a friend of such a member, you will most probably know through means of e-mail or otherwise what happened, if you are not a friend you cannot really be concerned.
So I think most of the "yes" votes are purely out of curiosity. What else can be the use of all this?

Your right hey. that isn't the reason for the ban

Sent you a PM

So a 'Mite has transgressed on a public forum,
let it be public knowledge he/she is banned.

Less mystery and suspician.

Howdie, Cheetah2111!

I have sat on my hands for more than 24hrs. I am just as adamant about this as I was 24hrs ago.

Why would this be necessary, mods do not have to justify their decisions, they have the rules set out and they have taken on the task of enforcing it. As it has been said over and over any action by the mods is a team decision, not a single person on the rampage. There seems to be a culture of questioning the mod's decisions and arguing and even taking on mods for applying the rules, self inflicted injury, it happens because the mods allow it to happen. Having the need for a topic like this "Moderators request for civil members! " is sad or worse it is a disgrace.

The constant whining and blubbering is more suited to a site like Hello Peter where bitching and moaning is in the order of the day, this forum should be one to share our common interest in nature, to enjoy other's experiences and to learn from the wealth of knowledge available. I wholeheartedly agree with Pumbaa.



I think Stark has summed it up perfectly. (my bold)

Sparksy
releasing the names does not imply questioning the mods
Infringement on a public forum = ban made made public. Fair and square.
Don't see any reason for mods to keep bans private