I need to credit wanswheel for his excellent research.
Does anyone know how I can contact him about this?
Minining Man was the conduit, however, he has also been banned.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
You might try pinging Firelock about how to get in touch with Miningman.
greyhounds I need to credit wanswheel for his excellent research. Does anyone know how I can contact him about this?
His excellent research on what?
Lithonia Operator greyhounds I need to credit wanswheel for his excellent research. Does anyone know how I can contact him about this? His excellent research on what?
On every subject that he decided to get involved in.
I can assure you that even though Wanwheel's been banished he still looks in on topics that interest him. I'm sure he'll notice the topic you opened!
However, I'm more than willing to be the go-between if you have any messages you'd care to send him. Private message me and I'll take it from there.
Thank you everyone. I've been in contact with wanswheel and it's all worked out.
Flintlock76 greyhounds I need to credit wanswheel for his excellent research. Does anyone know how I can contact him about this? I can assure you that even though Wanwheel's been banished he still looks in on topics that interest him. I'm sure he'll notice the topic you opened! However, I'm more than willing to be the go-between if you have any messages you'd care to send him. Private message me and I'll take it from there.
Not to get too political and get myself banned, but let's say there was a posting on Slashdot about a controversial figure for whom Facebook restored his posting privileges after a ban. This figure is sufficiently well known that Mr. Zuckerberg felt he had to go on record that "this person didn't do enough to get banned."
Speaking just hypothetically, what does a person have to do to get banned here instead of receiving a warning? Is it a matter of disregarding one or more warnings, or are there things a Forum participant can do that "woosh" they do not appear here?
Some wag on Slashdot, and there are many, quipped, "Not enough to get banned? The guy must work harder!"
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Paul MilenkovicSpeaking just hypothetically, what does a person have to do to get banned here instead of receiving a warning? Is it a matter of disregarding one or more warnings, or are there things a Forum participant can do that "woosh" they do not appear here?
I would opine that failure to heed warnings would probably lead to more zaps than single egregarious postings.
We aren't likely to see such warnings, as they'll probably move via PMs and emails.
It's also possible that complaints from multiple forum participants might get you banned sooner rather than later.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Paul Milenkovic [noted in part] "...Speaking just hypothetically, what does a person have to do to get banned here instead of receiving a warning? Is it a matter of disregarding one or more warnings, or are there things a Forum participant can do that "woosh" they do not appear here?.."
A response: Similarly, to walking into an 'innocent looking field', and suddenly finding oneseslf standing in a spread of live mines. Beware the noted "...Violation of Community Standards..." Warnimg:
Be very aware of the posted Forum rules....
Paul MilenkovicNot to get too political and get myself banned, but let's say there was a posting on Slashdot about a controversial figure for whom Facebook restored his posting privileges after a ban. This figure is sufficiently well known that Mr. Zuckerberg felt he had to go on record that "this person didn't do enough to get banned." Speaking just hypothetically, what does a person have to do to get banned here instead of receiving a warning? Is it a matter of disregarding one or more warnings, or are there things a Forum participant can do that "woosh" they do not appear here? Some wag on Slashdot, and there are many, quipped, "Not enough to get banned? The guy must work harder!"
The moderator responsible was replaced recently by the Moderator of the Model Railroader Forum. Lets leave it at that and move on.
The poster in question can have his account restored via Emailing Customer Service and explaining what happened specifically. I heard he was told that but choses not to do so for whatever reason.
CMStPnPThe moderator responsible was replaced recently by the Moderator of the Model Railroader Forum. Lets leave it at that and move on.
Who are the moderators? This is one of the only forums I've been to where the moderators aren't readily shown/listed.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
zugmannWho are the moderators? This is one of the only forums I've been to where the moderators aren't readily shown/listed.
Moderator is listed in each Forum if you are in doubt who the old Moderator was, look at the latest sticky posts. Only one Mod has those permissions for sticky posts and usually chief Mod of the Forum. So the next sticky post posted should have the new Mods face and name but you can also go look at the Model Railroader Forum and see.
CMStPnP The poster in question can have his account restored via Emailing Customer Service and explaining what happened specifically. I heard he was told that but choses not to do so for whatever reason.
I tried that after I got banned a few years ago, and they wouldn't do it. So I moved on and created another account with the same avatar and a similar name.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
BaltACD Minining Man was the conduit, however, he has also been banned.
Why were they banned? Please be as specific as possible.
SD70Dude after I got banned a few years ago, and they wouldn't do it. So I moved on and created another account with the same avatar and a similar name.
I've seen you exclaim over that several times the past few years. Not that it matters one way or the other to me personally, but isn't that a lot like saying "doesn't play by the rules", just begging for the authorities to focus their ire upon you?
Convicted One SD70Dude after I got banned a few years ago, and they wouldn't do it. So I moved on and created another account with the same avatar and a similar name. I've seen you exclaim over that several times the past few years. Not that it matters one way or the other to me personally, but isn't that a lot like saying "doesn't play by the rules", just begging for the authorities to focus their ire upon you?
And yet they haven't.
Even if they were to do so, wouldn't I just come back under yet another name?
JPS1 BaltACD Minining Man was the conduit, however, he has also been banned. Why were they banned? Please be as specific as possible.
Posting copyrighted material to the forum without proper permission.
SD70DudeEven if they were to do so, wouldn't I just come back under yet another name?
It is surprising that they flipped the switch on your newer account, allowing you to post without the prior moderator review . Which would be my concern if I was in that position.
Convicted One SD70Dude Even if they were to do so, wouldn't I just come back under yet another name? It is surprising that they flipped the switch on your newer account, allowing you to post without the prior moderator review . Which would be my concern if I was in that position.
SD70Dude Even if they were to do so, wouldn't I just come back under yet another name?
I was definitely on moderation initially, just like any new account (my posts wouldn't appear immediately). But I didn't say anything complex or controversial, so I guess I slipped by.
I think I added the Canadian Northern avatar right away after creating this account, but if I had really wanted to stay hidden I could have chosen a unrelated username and added an avatar after the initial moderation ended.
Anyway, things seem to have worked out, I obviously haven't committed any ban-worthy offenses over the last few years.
It's a shame Wanswheel and Miningman didn't follow a similar strategy to mine.
SD70DudeI was definitely on moderation initially, just like any new account (my posts wouldn't appear immediately). But I didn't say anything complex or controversial, so I guess I slipped by.
LOL, perhaps you slipped through a rabbit hole during one of the changes in the guard?
It matters not to me either way, I don't have any problem with your posts.
Just seems like you invite unnecessary scrutiny with your admissions. The kind that seldom ends well. (FWIW)
SD70DudeAnd yet they haven't. Even if they were to do so, wouldn't I just come back under yet another name?
Well you can't permanently ban someone anyway. Banning is based on IP and you enter banned IP's into a table. Problem arises that as you ban more and more IP's you start blocking off your website from others on the internet and traffic starts to decline. So common practice is to flush the restricted IP table every 6-18 months depending on accumulation. So nobody is ever banned permanently. Their account or pwd is changed or suspended. Most folks only try to come back within a 6 month period and give up.
Bans here are of course not based on IP - they are based on sign-in credentials. Otherwise how could you sign in to the forum from a hotel or a mobile device? The use of IP is only for identification at registration, not for posting.
The bans are accomplished through the software, and interestingly this not only triggers before any actual signing-in procedure takes place, but sets a cookie (perhaps more than one) that gives you an accelerated page from whatever local machine and browser you tried to log in from. In this respect, if no other, Kalmbach IT has thoroughly and correctly implemented effective security.
Unfortunately, it appears the bans are implemented for what may be the maximum length of ban the software is configured for: that's a year like 2058. Until then you can rest assured that no one will be able to use that 'banned' forum name again; you will note that the forum is already structured so that a given username can't be reused with a new 'contact' IP address... this was part of wanswheel's issue, he won't rejoin with a different username because that one has special meaning to him.
It will be interesting to see if the 'new and improved' forum software experience coming in 'stage 3' in the spring will use a different security approach, and that might include graylisting of 'suspect' (or unwanted) domains. For a forum of this kind, I don't think that level of gateway protection is necessary.
I don't understand why some feel the need to flount the rules? It's not like this is a paysite. It's free. It's like being invited into someone's house and being an arse.
BackshopIt's like being invited into someone's house and being an arse.
There are many intermediate stages, including Ang-style warnings that people are 'treading on sore water' as an old friend of my father's liked to say, followed up by PMs of more, or less, politeness stating the precise problems and 'watch out not to do them again'. In turn followed up by mandatory moderation, which prevents errant posting in the first place ... and in fact getting rid of any unsatisfactory post 'submitted' before anyone reads or is irritated by it.
Banning is a last resort to get rid of incorrigibles who Just Don't Get It. Or who repeatedly flaunt the terms of the TOS after being given the necessary Talmudic warning. What it isn't is a Star-Chamber like way to send posters an elite clique doesn't like down the memory hole, as George Carlin said, "forever"...
Overmod Backshop It's like being invited into someone's house and being an arse. The problem with a great many of these 'bans' is more like being invited to someone's house, and suddenly being informed that you've triggered them for some undisclosed reason and are being summarily kicked out on the sidewalk without recourse. There are many intermediate stages, including Ang-style warnings that people are 'treading on sore water' as an old friend of my father's liked to say, followed up by PMs of more, or less, politeness stating the precise problems and 'watch out not to do them again'. In turn followed up by mandatory moderation, which prevents errant posting in the first place ... and in fact getting rid of any unsatisfactory post 'submitted' before anyone reads or is irritated by it. Banning is a last resort to get rid of incorrigibles who Just Don't Get It. Or who repeatedly flaunt the terms of the TOS after being given the necessary Talmudic warning. What it isn't is a Star-Chamber like way to send posters an elite clique doesn't like down the memory hole, as George Carlin said, "forever"...
Backshop It's like being invited into someone's house and being an arse.
The problem with a great many of these 'bans' is more like being invited to someone's house, and suddenly being informed that you've triggered them for some undisclosed reason and are being summarily kicked out on the sidewalk without recourse.
We don't definitively know how many times Wanswheel or MM were warned. I believe someone said a while back that Wanswheel refused to agree to conditions of reinstatement.
Could you clarify your elite clique" remark?
SD70Dude JPS1 BaltACD Minining Man was the conduit, however, he has also been banned. Why were they banned? Please be as specific as possible. Posting copyrighted material to the forum without proper permission.
Thanks.
BackshopI don't understand why some feel the need to flount the rules
There is a fairly common mindset out there that is overly self-forgiving. Their perceptions are that they themselves somehow do the violations in a manner that is "acceptable", while everyone else does it "wrong" or goes a step too far. This same mentality might perceive personal insults as "just in fun" when they are the source, but unacceptable and abusive when they are on the receiving end.
That is just a general observation pointed towards your question, and in no way is it intended reflective of WW's and MM's specific situation.
We definitively know how many times miningman was warned: none. (unless he is a liar, which I doubt). That's official Kalmbach warnings; we of course warned him repeatedly not to repost 'for wanswheel' and advertise he was doing so, and kept saying so. I still worry for Wayne when he mentions something he posts as coming from there...
For the TOS to mean something, I'd agree that the least trace of sock-puppetry, especially on behalf of an acknowledged banned member posting more of the same material that ultimately got him banned, is grounds for discipline. It's the lack of warning, grievance, or appeal of any kind that comes across as high-handed.
wanswheel received warning in the form of 'permanent moderation' -- which of course gave Kalmbach oversight by pocket veto, as it were, over any long post as well as any perceived copyright violation or other issue of concern. It was while under that restriction that he came to be banned, apparently without notice for several days, as I recall only manifesting when he had to log out and back in for some reason. I don't believe anything was formally ever communicated to him; most of the justifications here are retroactive explanations 'after the fact' -- although I don't argue with their validity under the TOS.
The 'elite clique' is a comparatively few people at Kalmbach who put themselves in charge of this aspect of moderation. It clearly doesn't involve Dave Lassen when he was actively moderating some posts of concern; it clearly doesn't involve Ang, whose style is clearly to warn before discipline. On the other hand we have seen quite a few editors and columnists leaving just a little quicker or sooner than seems 'fully voluntary' -- not with positive effect on either the magazine or the site quality. As I suspect the old 'house policy' of disallowing any discussion of moderator policy may still be in force I will go no further, but that there is the same sort of arbitrary modac we suffered under Wibberley, I think there is little doubt.
I know I was banned without warning for making a joke about a friend -- and I did get an explanation, after a week, essentially saying it wasn't funny. I subsequently got put on moderation for something in a self-deleted post (it was intended as amusing and was factually correct, but read, and more significantly reacted to, as something much different and not at all a sense I would even imply, as if no other posts of mine 'counted' for anything here) -- that was reversed after a couple of weeks, in a grudging-sounding way, which I took as a stern warning to avoid stepping on invisible toes.
It would be interesting to learn from schlimm what the terms of his ban were... or how much notice or warning he received.
Convicted One Backshop I don't understand why some feel the need to flount the rules There is a fairly common mindset out there that is overly self-forgiving. Their perceptions are that they themselves somehow do the violations in a manner that is "acceptable", while everyone else does it "wrong" or goes a step too far. This same mentality might perceive personal insults as "just in fun" when they are the source, but unacceptable and abusive when they are on the receiving end.
Backshop I don't understand why some feel the need to flount the rules
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.