Partial Credit
in Feedback & Suggestions ·
casualcanyon3 said:Hmm. In my estimation, permanent bans should be strictly reserved for those individuals who weaponize crude insults, peddle overt or thinly veiled hate speech, indulge in chauvinism, or spout misogyny and misandry; I’m talking about the types who systematically derail entire threads, ignite flame wars, and effectively poison any discussion they touch... all while doing so with a calculated persistence even after receiving multiple warnings and temporary suspensions. To me, a permanent ban represents the total "excommunication" of a user's digital identity, which is an incredibly heavy-handed move.
The tendency toward "compulsive post spamming" mentioned on Wikipedia (😁), while certainly disruptive to a thread's flow, is practically harmless when compared to the behaviors I just described, and frankly, a permanent ban feels far too draconian in this instance. Perhaps this serves as a sufficiently stern warning for them to watch their step, and if we are to avoid jumping straight to a lifetime ban, we ought to grant one final opportunity. Personally, I don't perceive this individual to be malicious or truly harmful, and it seems quite clear they are actually part of the community here.
If some random Redditor showed up now and started trashing every thread by spamming posts and chat, I doubt anyone would find it nearly as charming.
Since Wikipedia is a major figure here, it’s not quite that catastrophic.
I like Wikipedia as a user—far from it being an issue—but he knows perfectly well how many warnings he’s had, and how many times he's promised me he’d fix his act.
Countless times.
He stays on his best behavior for a few days, then slips back into the old ways and starts chatting again.
The partial ban was used as an educational tool because, clearly, nothing else worked—not the formal warnings, not the one-day bans, nor my own warnings that a partial ban was coming if he didn't improve.
At the end of the day, a partial ban on the US or Forest isn't the end of the world; Wikipedia's crew likes him, and from what I can see, they followed him over to the Off-Topic section, so he won't be left totally isolated. Plus, six months will fly by.
If he asks to have the ban lifted later, I’ll probably vote to give him one more chance.