This was brought up in this thread:

https://faygoluvers.net/v5/forum/general-discussion/ban-the-kkk-or-dont/page-4/

As things stand, there are currently 2 people who have the capabilities to block users / IPs, and there are 3 moderators who have the ability to delete individual posts.  Psyral Infection and ScottieD are the two who have the ability to block users.

In my experience with the site, there was one user who got banned from posting.  When the question arises on whether a user should be banned, the moderators typically respond that they can’t, Psyral Infection tells you something to the effect of “talk to Scottie,” and then Scottie gets the final word.  In the most recent case, I have not personally seen Scottie get involved, and I don’t think he should because he doesn’t regularly post in the forums.  Also, he should not be expected to police them since he’s the owner of the site and has put a person in place who is responsible for doing such.

So my proposal is that the moderators should be given the ability to place temporary bans on users who are reported for violating the rules, then it should be submitted to the admins who then confirm or deny whether it was justified.  It should be as simple as “this is the rule…this is the user breaking it…”  That would remove any concern of moderators abusing power, and it would help clean up the forums a bit.

I also think the rules could stand to be revamped a little bit to remove certain types of posts.  The current rules are as follows:

Rules:

1. No spamming.

2. No illegal download links.

3. Try not to make duplicate threads. Use the search function.

4. Try to post your topic in it’s most appropriate forum section.

5. No Pornographic links or images.

Now there are problems with several of these, specifically that they leave the offenses and resulting punishment up for interpretation, and the wording itself is not completely clear in all cases.  That’s where the idea of having it go through 2 or 3 people would come in.  For example:

1. That should include posting large quantities of unwanted comment across all sections.  I have only seen it interpreted as removing topics started by spam bots that are trying to advertise sites.

2. That one is good.

3. This one would utilize the moderator’s ability to move posts rather than instigating a ban.  The way I have seen this work is that if someone posts a topic that already exists, they are met with “ummm…this already exists, idiot.”  And if they use the search and find an old topic that is years old and post in it, they are met with “why are you digging up 3 year old threads, idiot.”  So that one could use some work.

4. Again, moderators being able to move posts is helpful.  That’s rarely utilized.

5. That’s good, obviously.

As far as a few that are not mentioned, I think there are some that would be useful and make the forums a little cleaner.

• no slandering other users
• no racially offensive posts
• no real world threats (I don’t think verbal things are a problem because of the nature of ICP’s lyrics, but keep it on the internet)
• no retro-actively banning users who violated rules prior to them being established.

Ok, that’s my take on it.  My intent is for this to progress as a civil conversation.  Thoughts?