# Banning?



## rob.returns

HI moderators!
I would just like to ask If somebody gets banned will he or she be warned through private message or gets banned right there and then? 

Thanks!


----------



## Jana337

rob.returns said:
			
		

> HI moderators!
> I would just like to ask If somebody gets banned will he or she be warned through private message or gets banned right there and then?


Usually by many PMs. Spammers and vulgar adolescents get banned without warning.

Jana


----------



## elroy

Jana337 said:
			
		

> Usually by many PMs. Spammers and vulgar adolescents get banned without warning.
> 
> Jana


 
Just vulgar _adolescents_?  Are vulgar adults off the hook?


----------



## rob.returns

Except those outright prankers and vulgar words, will somebody be banned ASAP? But she/he will be warned right?


----------



## Jana337

rob.returns said:
			
		

> Except those outright prankers and vulgar words, will somebody be banned ASAP?


I cannot think of such a case.


> But she/he will be warned right?


Sure. Usually not once, as I said. Some of us tend to exhibit undue clemency rather than uncompromising severity.

Jana


----------



## Merlin

I believe there's a warning forst. I personally witnessed two user who invaded the forum a couple of days ago and man, they kept on talking about porn! I believe I called ZEBEDEE, Garyknight and another moderator's attention. Fortunately they were banned and all thier posts were deleted. It's really alarming if you guys saw thier posts.


----------



## cuchuflete

Thank you again Merlin, for sending the alert.

There is at least one exception in which a PM or public warning is not given.  If we discover that a member is a former banned member, but has entered with a new user name, they will be banned instantly.  They will have already had sufficient warnings under the old user name.


----------



## Philippa

Hello!
There is a bit in the FAQs under What are moderators? Mods job description on this:


> Sometimes we have to deal with problems such as advertising/promotion, systematic chatting, aggressive behaviour, etc. Promotional posts and spam are removed. For behavioural issues,
> 1) the member is asked to behave with a public notice, which may come from a forum member or Mod. As most situations are just misunderstandings, they automatically resolve at this point.
> 2) If the problem persists, a PM notice follows.
> 3) Last step, if the problem continues, the member is banned. It's rare but it happens.


Saludos
Philippa


----------



## Sev

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> There is at least one exception in which a PM or public warning is not given.  If we discover that a member is a former banned member, but has entered with a new user name, they will be banned instantly.  They will have already had sufficient warnings under the old user name.


Just out of curiosity, how do you know that ? Have you got something to know the location of users ?? I know nothing about computer's stuff...


----------



## Benjy

well.. we have ip addresses. we also have sometimes been known to engage the old grey matter


----------



## lauranazario

Sev said:
			
		

> Just out of curiosity, how do you know that ? Have you got something to know the location of users ?? I know nothing about computer's stuff...


The WR servers keep track of ALL users' activity. vBulletin software also assists in keeping track of IP addresses. Cross-referencing and matching are part of the benefits provided by the software used to run these forums.
If a member who has been banned insists on "returning" under a new username, the issue can be dealt with as needed.

Saludos,
LN


----------



## Sev

Well, I really don't know much about computers, so I looked to see what an IP address was...I understand now. Thank you Ben and Laura. If I was to be banned one day, because of my well-know vulgarity and agressive behaviour, I'll have to change my computer...


----------



## cuchuflete

Sev said:
			
		

> Well, I really don't know much about computers, so I looked to see what an IP address was...I understand now. Thank you Ben and Laura. If I was to be banned one day, because of my well-know vulgarity and agressive behaviour, I'll have to change my computer...



May we all grow to be so aggressive and vulgar, Sev!

It's not your computer...it's the way your current or future computer connects to the internet.  I recently had a number of guests.  While they were here, using my internet connection, they all had the same address.  When they went home, those same laptops had different addresses.

It's not as much fun as eating good dark chocolate, but learning this stuff isn't too hard.  Just do a search for IP addresses in wikipedia or similar resources.


cheers,
Cuchu


----------



## Eugens

¿Y por qué algunas personas que tienen un cartel de "banned" pueden seguir enviando posts? ¿O es que se trata de posts que no crean problemas y que son anteriores a haber sido "banned"?
Si dos personas viven en la misma casa y usan la misma pc, y una es "banned"; la otra si posteriormente quiere ser forer@, ¿nunca lo va a poder ser desde esa computadora? ¿O quizá Uds. los mods también tienen poderes para saber quién está detrás de la pc?


----------



## belén

Eugens said:
			
		

> ¿Y por qué algunas personas que tienen un cartel de "banned" pueden seguir enviando posts? ¿O es que se trata de posts que no crean problemas y que son anteriores a haber sido "banned"?
> Si dos personas viven en la misma casa y usan la misma pc, y una es "banned"; la otra si posteriormente quiere ser forer@, ¿nunca lo va a poder ser desde esa computadora? ¿O quizá Uds. los mods también tienen poderes para saber quién está detrás de la pc?


 
Las personas que han sido "banned" no pueden enviar más posts, así que se trata de posts anteriores a su "banneamiento" (ahora viene la RAE y me "bannea" a mi por hereje)


----------



## cuchuflete

Eugens said:
			
		

> Si dos personas viven en la misma casa y usan la misma pc, y una es "banned"; la otra si posteriormente quiere ser forer@, ¿nunca lo va a poder ser desde esa computadora? ¿O quizá Uds. *los mods también tienen poderes para saber quién está detrás de la pc?*



Hola Eugens,  

No solamente detrás, sino también dentro y debajo de....  Lo de *al lado* resulta un poco más difícil, pero el Sr. Kellogg tiene capacidad artística para estos casos.  

Un saludo,
Cuchu


----------



## rob.returns

I was posting this because I did have a friend here who was banned for no apparent reason, he was not warned. 
(he's not vulgar but aggressive). Maybe being aggressive should be warned first because let's face it we have different cultures, and different issues. We are prone to be mad especially if we feel that our culture or belief is being stepped upon. Just a suggestion.

Another question:
How bout if the user wants to change his country and location(using fake country for privacy). But it reflects on the IP address that he is really from U.S. Will he be banned for that matter?


----------



## DDT

rob.returns said:
			
		

> I was posting this because I did have a friend here who was banned for no apparent reason, he was not warned.
> (he's not vulgar but aggressive). Maybe being aggressive should be warned first because let's face it we have different cultures, and different issues. We are prone to be mad especially if we feel that our culture or belief is being stepped upon. Just a suggestion.
> 
> Another question:
> How bout if the user wants to change his country and location(using fake country for privacy). But it reflects on the IP address that he is really from U.S. Will he be banned for that matter?



Let me please remind you that if you have personal remarks to address to the mods activity (or to anyone in particular) you'd better use the PM feature

DDT


----------



## rob.returns

Sorry and Thanks. Its not a personal remark Sir Moderator. Im just really curious. Could you please instead PM me the answer Sirs/Maams. Thanks Again!


----------



## cuchuflete

rob.returns said:
			
		

> Another question:
> How bout if the user wants to change his country and location(using fake country for privacy). But it reflects on the IP address that he is really from U.S. Will he be banned for that matter?



From the forum rules, posted on every page in FAQ:



> *Do not pretend to be someone you are not. This includes gender and nationality. Who you are and where you are from is very important to understanding any translations or other language information that you provide.*



That seems pretty clear.  Do you agree?  

Violations of forum rules are grounds for banning.  Sometimes circumstances suggest warnings; sometimes Mods act instantly to protect the mission and peacefulness of these forums.  At the time of registration, every member is advised that such decisions are made at the sole discretion of the Administrator and Moderators.  

Some members have been banned for activities never seen in the public forums, but for conduct in PMs etc.  The total number of banned members is very tiny.  There is *always* a strong reason.

As DDT has stated, if you wish to discuss a specific case, that must be done by PM with the Mods.

Best regards,
Cuchu


----------



## rob.returns

So if you are a person whose concerned about privacy. It's no, no here. Because its language and culture.

Thanks Chuchu yours is the best answer yet. Thanks Again!


----------



## Joca

I would like to know how or when a ban can be lifted. Does the banned member have a right to appeal for him/herself? Or are other members entitled to intercede on his/her behalf?


----------



## cherine

Joca said:


> I would like to know how or when a ban can be lifted.


A banned person is banned for ever. Be sure that banning is not a decision that's easily or lightly taken decision. It's always preceded by several warnings, attempts to "correct" the behavior that eventually causes the banning.
Some foreros do change, and they stay.
Others unfortunately dont, and the get banned.



> Does the banned member have a right to appeal for him/herself? Or are other members entitled to intercede on his/her behalf?


As long as the "warning" process is going on, the best appeal is a change of behavior (stop chatting, stop going off-topic, stop attacking other foreros and/or mods or using foul language, respect the rules of the forum...).

So, there's no reason to bother yourself with "interceding". Banning means it's already too late to intercede.


----------



## jann

rob.returns said:
			
		

> How bout if the user wants to change his country and location(using fake country for privacy). But it reflects on the IP address that he is really from U.S. Will he be banned for that matter?





			
				cuchuflete said:
			
		

> *Do not pretend to be someone you are not. This includes gender and nationality. Who you are and where you are from is very important to understanding any translations or other language information that you provide.*
> 
> That seems pretty clear. Do you agree?





			
				rob.returns said:
			
		

> So if you are a person whose concerned about privacy. It's no, no here. Because its language and culture.


 
I hope Mr. Cuchu won't mind me adding my two cents:

The rules say you should not misrepresent your native language or where you are from. Your *native language + country* are important here (UK English, Belgian French, Argentinian Spanish, etc). But provided you include this information in the "native of" field in your profile, I see nothing that would prevent you from leaving your "location" blank if you are concerned about your privacy. The rules do not require you to disclose your current geographic location, nor is this information necessarily relevant to your language abilities. (Deliberately adding false information in your profile is, however, another matter, quite different from simply leaving an optional field blank!)

(Perhaps I only felt the need to say this because I do not choose to specify my own current geographical location, even though I am a moderator)


----------



## Alxmrphi

papillon said:


> I think what Jana is saying is that sharing the same IP address does not automatically result in the banning of all users of this address.



I had assumed that bans were given by I.P address, it seems pretty silly to just ban the username.
Therefore, if we say, someone used a computer at a school they worked in a lot, and this was a network, then all the schools computers would not be able to log on and learn and the poor students will be deprived of our fantastic fountain of knowledge...... even if the headmaster complains to the Administrator.

In Summary: Nobody else could come on with the same I.P address, and so it does automatically result in the banning of all users.


----------



## Jana337

We mostly ban usernames. If we, for example, discover that we get a lot of spam from a particular IP address, we block it. This has happened to quite a few phone spammers.


----------



## Alxmrphi

Oh, but then banned people just re-register, right?
What do you mean by "phone" spammers as well?

Grammar Avengers!


----------



## Jana337

Just some of them. They are pretty easy to identify (same kind of misbehavior they were banned for).


----------



## Moogey

Alex_Murphy said:


> I had assumed that bans were given by I.P address, it seems pretty silly to just ban the username.
> Therefore, if we say, someone used a computer at a school they worked in a lot, and this was a network, then all the schools computers would not be able to log on and learn and the poor students will be deprived of our fantastic fountain of knowledge......



Yes, actually this happened to my school...it was banned from here. What happened is this: I told my Italian teacher about this great place, and he told his students about it from another Italian class and asked them to go to it for that day's lesson, and they signed up and started spamming the forum and then the school's IP was banned.

That's one reason why I'm not on here as much; I used to do a lot of posting during my free time in school! (We're all required to have laptops there and you have wireless internet, etc.)

But I guess it makes sense that it was banned because students would probably continue to SPAM WR. My Italian teacher is sad though!

-M


----------



## panjandrum

Alex_Murphy said:


> [...]
> What do you mean by "phone" spammers as well?
> 
> Grammar Avengers!


If we weren't so diligent about removing them, these forums would be packed with threads advertising cellphones. 
Wanna bya gnocchia?


----------



## Jana337

Enjoy:


> 2020i ...... $160 Qtek 2020 ....... $160 Qtek 1010.......$100 Qtek 9600.......$150 (sidekick) sidekick 1.........$80usd side kick 11........$100usd SIDE-KICK T-Mobile Sidekick II Cell Phone........$100 T-Mobile Sidekick II....................$80 Sidekick II T-Mobile with Color Screen...$120 T-MobileSidekick II TMO to Go Prepaid Phone...$110 T-Mobile Sidekick II Phone (T-Mobile)......$100 T-Mobile Sidekick II T-Mobile Replacement Phone...$110 T-Mobile Sidekick - Data Only Product Features..$90 T-Mobile SideKick II.............$100 Mobile Sidekick II................$100 Mobile Sidekick III................$150 (These games are brandnew sealed in original Box.)


The post I took this part from is about 12 times longer than the excerpt.

The prose is quite dense, isn't it?

I ban several spammers a week.


----------



## Joca

cherine said:


> A banned person is banned for ever. Be sure that banning is not a decision that's easily or lightly taken decision. It's always preceded by several warnings, attempts to "correct" the behavior that eventually causes the banning.
> Some foreros do change, and they stay.
> Others unfortunately dont, and the get banned.
> 
> 
> As long as the "warning" process is going on, the best appeal is a change of behavior (stop chatting, stop going off-topic, stop attacking other foreros and/or mods or using foul language, respect the rules of the forum...).
> 
> So, there's no reason to bother yourself with "interceding". Banning means it's already too late to intercede.


 
Thanks Cherine for all these explanations. A ban, provided that it was not one of a troll or a spammer, may prove to be a relief for some in the first moments, but in the long run it may be felt as a real loss for the whole community. 

On the one hand, I agree that banning is at times a necessary measure and I am certain that all moderators are clement and reasonable and usually interact with one other a lot before they hammer it out. On the other hand, I understand there is too little that other members can do in the case of a ban even if they feel it is unfair or can be avoided. 

I know these are the rules, and I will abide by them. But I wish there were at least a special place for people to "mourn" banned members, with whom they had a significant liaison, and to tell the others how they feel about the ban. It can't be used for pleading for a lift of the ban, though. 

Since bans are not taking place all the time, I don't think this special room would make for a deviation from the main focus of WR. It would be simply a much-needed place (imo) for ventilation and redressing. 

A banned member, that was particularly productive, albeit having made fatal mistakes, probably deserves this final homage from the community.


----------



## cherine

Joca said:


> On the other hand, I understand there is too little that other members can do in the case of a ban even if they feel it is unfair or can be avoided.


You may feel it unfair or avoidable because you don't know all the details that led to it.
It's out of respect to the forer@s -who got banned- that we don't discuss their behavior or mistakes in public while trying to convince them to change behavior; so it's only normal you don't understand why they get banned.


> I know these are the rules, and I will abide by them. But I wish there were at least a special place for people to "mourn" banned members, with whom they had a significant liaison, and to tell the others how they feel about the ban. It can't be used for pleading for a lift of the ban, though.


I think we all have better things to do with our time than "mourn" the members who got themselves banned, no matter how dear they were/are to us.
Please don't think that we enjoy banning the members, specially those who gave a lot to this forum. You should know that it was something really serious that "forced" us to make that decision.

One more thing: discussing this would be against the forum's rule# 45:


> Discussions about moderator or administrator actions are welcome in email or Private Messages, but should not be discussed in public forums. This is out of respect for the members and moderators involved.


So we can't create this special place you're suggesting.


> Since bans are not taking place all the time, I don't think this special room would make for a deviation from the main focus of WR. It would be simply a much-needed place (imo) for ventilation and redressing.
> 
> A banned member, that was particularly productive, albeit having made fatal mistakes, probably deserves this final homage from the community.


If you were friends with a member that's now banned, I believe you had at least their email address, so that you can continue to communicate with them, even off the forum.


----------



## Josh_

Why not have a one month ban (a cool-off period, as it were) for a long-established member who, for whatever reason, had to be banned.  I mean the behavior that led to the ban cannot be representative of all of the individual's posts.  If, after the one month "cool-off" period, the individual returns and for whatever reason had to be banned again then it could be made permanent.  This is done on another forum I sometimes go to and it seems to work.


----------



## jlc246

I also miss someone who was recently banned. However, I have been in a position similar to that of the moderators, in which I knew what caused someone to be fired. Those of us who knew what had happened were in a very painful position, because *we could not talk about* the events involved. We had to endure a great deal of well meaning but wearing debate, emotion, and attempted intervention while we patiently explained the little bit that we were able to explain without touching anything personal, revealing events that people did not know about, or clarifying unknown facts about what was "known." We were legally unable to talk about the events, but we were also protecting the privacy of the person who had broken the rules. It was very difficult not to be able to say, "If you knew what I know, there would be no question in your mind about whether the director made the right decision." It was the _only_ decision she could have made that would have upheld the law and been fair, but to protect the person's privacy and future employability, we could not even say that much. We had to trust that eventually the talk would die down and most people would judge us by our whole selves and not by one set of circumstances in which they knew only the tip of the iceberg.

Back to the topic of banning: I am sad, but I trust that the moderators not only consulted each other in this case and did everything they could to avoid banning but also had reasons for their actions that go beyond what they can say and we can see. Undoubtedly, moderators are individuals who think, feel, and explain differently. I believe that in this matter we need to trust them as a group and accept that their actions were as considerate and fair as they could be.

I know that we are well-meaning in our efforts to understand and to think of alternatives. I know that some of us (including myself) have good reasons to be fond of and grateful to someone who was in many ways a dear and important part of our community. I'm only saying that we need to understand that there are things we cannot understand without invading the privacy that the moderators are trying to protect. 

In spite of the risk of causing further hurt feelings, I will give an example of what I mean. If a "cooling off period" was ever granted, could the moderators say that so-and-so was given a chance to cool off? Not only would they be revealing private information about so-and-so (whether or not he/she returned to the behavior that caused the need for cooling off), but also they would be accused of being unfair to someone-or-other because someone "knows" that someone-or-other did not get a cooling off period! Of course, the moderators could not talk about someone-or-other either without breaching his/her privacy, whether or not he/she received a cooling off or even did the slightest thing wrong. If they tried to talk about a cooling off period in the abstract, it would engender debate about the rules for cooling off. If they gave an example of cooling off, it would lead to people trying to explain why that example did not apply to so-and-so or someone-or-other. The moderators know that trying to explain beyond a certain point or justify themselves will only lead to more discussion touching what they cannot discuss. 

I will close these thoughts by saying thank you to all the members, moderators included, who care about WR and about each other. WR would not be the wonderful collection of resources and the community that it is without you.


----------



## Jana337

Moderator note: I am sorry but we will not discuss specifics of individual banishments. You don't know everything we do and we are not allowed to talk about everything we know. It doesn't lead anywhere.

Rest assured that we do not ban hastily - and especially cases involving long-standing members are subject to detailed scrutiny.

Cooling off: If you receive a final warning with consequences of further misbehavior clearly outlined, shouldn't it cool you off to a sufficient degree? 

Blocking access to some forums: I don't think the software permits it (I may be wrong) but the idea is not necessarily based on realistic assumptions (misbehavior limited to one place) anyway.


----------

