Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Ban Discussion Megathread

I've heard this a lot, and I get it (no sarcasm). I'll be honest and say I don't report nearly as often as I should, but it often feels like an effort in futility when 80% of the community supports those kinds of posts, including some mods.
I guess the differentiation then is whether silent acceptance is equivalent to support, and whether vocal support is representative of greater group inclinations. I can't speak definitively on the matter since I have not been active for quite some time, but I am willing to bet that what we are discussing is only the apparent support/lack of interest in reforming behaviors. As you said yourself, you feel it is futile to report things, presumably because you feel that you are going against the grain - but keep in mind that you are potentially only going against the vocal minority. The unilateral "Free X" crowd is mostly the same handful of names, for example.

I still think this is missing the forest for the trees, I think the argument is less "he's doing it too" and more "everyone else is doing it more and worse." It's like getting pulled over for going 5 over the speed limit and someone goes by pushing 30 over and the cop doesn't even phone it in. I get mods are human and aren't omnipresent, but that still will always leave a sour taste in everyone's mouth because it looks like (and can be) uneven application of the rules.
Sure - just as with the cop, this inevitably happens in any manual system of authority IMO. The cop can only pull over so many people at once, and if the car speeds by on a parallel street that is out of sight, then can the cop really be blamed for the oversight? Similarly, and to bring back the aforementioned point, we can't action what we don't see or what isn't brought directly to our attention. You've already said this, though, so I guess it's just a matter of expectations not meeting reality. You may expect that we should see more, I expect that users report offending behavior more, when neither meets the mark then this is the gray area we inhabit.

However that will inevitably lead to speculation based on available evidence, because "you don't have all the information, and we do, so stop thinking about it" is never going to be satisfying to anyone. It's never going to be enough. I've heard Serge's argument that caving to every request like this would lead to real problems, and I even agree with him on that, but I don't think it's so black and white. I think there can be a middle ground, especially when it's a top-tier controversial case. Maybe lock the final-straw thread and leave it up (assuming it's nothing egregious like bragging) in extreme cases to put down dissent.

The cost-benefit analysis on our end, if I can so liberally speak for the whole team, is that it is better to remove offending posts and have people doubt our choices (which the vocal minority always will no matter what we do or don't do) than it is to facilitate martyrdom, grandstanding, drama queenery, and all of that. If it was policy to leave offending posts up, then this would encourage that kind of behavior. Making an exception for high profile cases would, in my opinion, be even worse because it would continue to drive the idea that some people are above the "law" and that they "deserve" to have a last say - when they are usually the ones that cause the biggest problems/unrest through the cult of personality, post count halo, whatever you want to call it.

If we can bring it back to this case in particular, there would be no way to do that with what I personally feel is the most clear-cut violation of forum etiquette, namely the false reports. I firmly believe that users' reports should never be publicized and they aren't public at all as it is, which means that to provide evidence of wrongdoing would necessitate actively exposing internal workings of the site. That's too much to ask for IMO.

Knajjd listed other reasons that the user was in violation of the rules, so I can't speak for his experience. I had also submitted a few posts for consideration in mod chat myself, but because of my previous involvement with the user in question, I felt that it would be genuinely unfair for me to action them without referring to the team as a whole. Those posts were not deleted and they were not deemed serious enough of an offense to be actionable, even though I believe they were definitely spam/low effort, personal attacks, etc. This is all to say that even on a "one strike" policy, the team as a whole erred on the side of lenience for a while with this user even when individual moderators thought that a post could be actionable. I know this isn't as good as providing "evidence" of wrongdoing, but I hope it counts for something - the fact that we DO discuss these cases and we do generally have differing opinions, that we as a whole try to pass cases off to other mods when we feel we may be biased, etc. That's about the best I can offer in this case.

With all due respect, how is this any different, regardless of what follows?

What follows is the crux of the statement IMO - that it was deliberate non-compliance or disregard for what was told to that user, who had a lengthy moderation history going into all of this mess. That is entirely their choice, but that does not free them from the consequences. If there were issues with the merit of that decision/status, then those could and should have been discussed - not directly violated like in the stoner at the cop station analogy.

I want to genuinely thank you for taking the time to actually respond to my comment in full and arguing in good faith. I don't get a lot of that around here. (I'm not being sarcastic, I appreciate it)

No problem.
 
@AntiPain stop spamming please, I don't want you to get permaban :cryfeels:
 
Free @Dindu_Nuffin! He dindu nuffin, mods
 
Can't you mods give @Eskimocel a second chance? The forum is not the same without him :feelsbadman:
 
-complains about people naming the jew
-complains about intolerance to fags and their prolapsed anuses
-complains about sensible solutions to female hypergamy

No I'd say I hit the nail on the head.
He's a jew.

@Ibuprofen 600mg ??
 
Oh thanks , I didn't saw his comment
 
WTF DID YOU DID TO MY BRO @IamJacksBrokenHeart :cryfeels: :cryfeels: :cryfeels: :cryfeels: :cryfeels: :cryfeels:
full
 
Second requested ban within a month tbh. No self-evident reason.
 
Got banned for like 5 minutes
Just get the shortest ban in the history of the forum theory

What happened to Evildoer? If anyone remembers him... I was going through some random old posts and I saw that he was banned. I can't even find him on the members list anymore jfl.
 
@eldaring
How could you ban him right after his post milestone
 
@eldaring he's perma'd but can you mods at least tell us the reason?
 
i have never seen a ricecel get banned before tbh
 

Similar threads

kay'
Replies
10
Views
375
nakolas
nakolas
Shaktiman
Replies
8
Views
581
Emba
Emba
Darth_Aurelius
Replies
83
Views
5K
based_meme
B
Eremetic
Replies
17
Views
2K
pulp
pulp
Eremetic
Replies
20
Views
3K
Serpents reign
Serpents reign

Users who are viewing this thread

  • edgelordcel
  • LeFrenchCel
shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top