WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2024 Poal.co

237

Were there any others?

The similar timing of the bans and amount of time they'd been allowed to spam Poal without being banned makes me think there was a change in thinking about how Poal is going to operate.

I can't say I disagree with either ban (except that one is clearly going to keep making alts and coming back, so it's basically ineffective). But I also can't really put my finger on why I agree with either ban. They're annoying niggers, but @PuttIt0ut was pretty much just posting in his designated subs (unless @AOU was moving them) and @the_old_ones for now seemed content to try to boost his points and restore/clean his reputation and remove the account tag, by posting anti-pedo (hmm) news and only occasionally autistically threatening people in comment sections.

So bring us in on it, admins. What is on your minds?

Were there any others? The similar timing of the bans and amount of time they'd been allowed to spam Poal without being banned makes me think there was a change in thinking about how Poal is going to operate. I can't say I disagree with either ban (except that one is clearly going to keep making alts and coming back, so it's basically ineffective). But I also can't really put my finger on why I agree with either ban. They're annoying niggers, but @PuttIt0ut was pretty much just posting in his designated subs (unless @AOU was moving them) and @the_old_ones for now seemed content to try to boost his points and restore/clean his reputation and remove the account tag, by posting anti-pedo (hmm) news and only occasionally autistically threatening people in comment sections. So bring us in on it, admins. What is on your minds?

(post is archived)

[–] 9 pts

It all seems very jewy, to me. A bunch of jewish niggers trying to push the limits to see how much the goyim will take, before proverbially throwing the jew down the well so they can cry anti-semitism. It's all D&C shit, and we all fall for it all the damn time. Honestly? Fuck their "rights." Anyone who's actively trying to harm the community has willingly given up their citizenship, IMO, and should be reclassified as an enemy combatant. Enemy combatants get the rope.

[–] 6 pts

So who gets to determine who is harming the community? Are there any criteria they should follow in making the determination?

[–] 9 pts

I knew this would be the next question in said train of thought. My response to that is to do a proverbial cost-benefit analysis (infogalactic.com). Is a user's behaviour a net-positive, negative, or neutral. Would banning them be a net-positive, negative, or neutral. "Negative" behaviour, overall, is of little importance— it's the causes of their effects that you need to look at. Is someone's "negative" behaviour driving traffic and enabling lively discussion? Cool. Is someone's negative behaviour shitting up the front page, disrupting everyone's experience and generally pissing all the other users off? Off with his head!

We're all human, and nothing is perfect. 100% of the users won't be on-board with every decision, and every action will piss someone off. Any solution we can conceivably come up with will never be totally just and ideal, because of this. Ignoring an obvious problem, however, is not a solution.

[–] 6 pts

Cool. Thank you for the well thought out response.

Initially the potential problem I see with this is that it's completely arbitrary. The 'damage done' and 'good it brings' scales are totally subjective, and would probably even vary day-to-day depending on the decision-makers' moods. I think there is also the potential that over the long term the goalposts could shift, to the point where just generally being a prick is 'doing more harm than good' in the decisoon-maker's eyes.

That said, it seems judgement calls have to be made. And by extension, poor judgement calls have to be tolerated to some extent by the userbase. I believe this has already happened, as the admins are not perfect.

This is an incomplete answer to your proposition. I'll have to think it over a bit more.