Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: UnBelievable who wrote (12230)	8/19/2000 6:05:53 PM
From: SI Bob	Respond to of 436258

My concern is suspensions where people who are suspended do not know why I usually tell people why at the time I'm giving the suspension unless I either think they know for certain what they did, or the current state of the admin tools makes it more difficult. But if someone has been suspended and emails me asking why, I always answer. Always. Including this time. I have no idea why it's generally being believed otherwise, and can't control what other people say about my actions or inactions and won't "clear the air" by publicly discussing those actions unless they themselves post incorrect statements about those actions. For example, if someone posts that they were suspended for being long a penny stock when the truth is that they were suspended for spamming it to a dozen threads. It seems that there are issues of context and sensitivity of the individuals "discussing" a subject which of necessity require the application of somewhat subjective judgement on your part in determining the potential "punishment". The latter part is certainly correct, and the former sometimes. That is why I'm here. And why we went through many applicants before determining that Jeff is capable of making those calls too. We do have to get to know the community and subcommunities and all of the dynamics and take it all into account when making admin decisions sometimes. But when people go on the attack, or when much of a person's or group's contributions are the ridicule of others (others who also paid to be here and who are also deserving of respect) the "context and sensitivity" of those involved really doesn't mean much. Except in those cases which unambiguously violate the TOU, both as stated and enforced, I would hope that violators are warned and only suspended for intentional violations. That covers a tiny minority of violations. I would hope that most people could see the inappropriateness of telling someone to go f*** themselves, or hitting them with a multitude of ridiculing, berating, or belittling posts. The Terms of Use says it best when it says "Chances are - if you're honest, sincere and civil with your posts - you will never have to worry about the SI Administrators." I sometimes feel I get more credit than I deserve for making a lot of really tough calls, because it seems to me that most of the calls are pretty easy. Nobody wants to be on the receiving end of uncivil conduct. Or perhaps more correctly and relevantly, we don't want people to be subjected to it here. Everyone should be treated with respect, even when we disagree with or actively dislike them. We should be able to disagree with people without belittling them for their "wrong" opinions, making the disagreement a personal issue, or inviting them to go have carnal knowledge of themselves. It's not necessary to knock others down to elevate ourselves. Regards, SI Admin (Bob)