Well often negative posts are impulse reactions. A 15 to 30 day waiting period would definitely reduce the "impulse" posters.
I think a 15-30 day period would also have an affect on membership count.......we dont want that do we??? But if the count is of no importance ( a selling point to advertisers) then maybe 15-30day wouldnt be so bad for us or Baron....... peace and happy friday to all
We should have a voting feature to rank each poster. If you get too many negatives then the name converts to read only or something for 30 days. What about blocking the first 9 of 12 digits on the subnet for the chronic violators?
Alot of good forums are being ruined by these rogue posters. They come in, try to discredit someone, and then a typing shouting match ensues taking the forum off topic, and eventually having it ignored. At some point the senior member and even the junior one's will get fed up and not post as often or at all. If you don't like the suggestions put forward, at least come up with something.
I agree that it is out of hand especially with one certain individual. Here are my two suggestions: If someone has more than 10 or so posts deleted by moderators, their account automatically gets suspended or deleted. If someone starts a thread entitled something along the lines of "Where's FPC?" their account automatically gets suspended.
or you could just ignore them. If they dont have anyone to play with.....they will take their ball and go home.......
In addotion to that, if the bulk of the postersmessages are negative and are intended to discredit someone or ruin a forum that person should be suspended. And to prevent him from signing as another poster, the system should monitor the IP and e-mail addresses of new posters and compare them to suspended posters. A determined person can circumvent these rules, but at least they'll be something in place to stop him/her again. Suspend someone enough times, and they will get frustrated.
You're going to suspend someone for starting a thread called "Where's FPC?" Isn't that just a tad bit harsh? I can see if the same user continues to do stupid things, that they should receive a warning and then suspension, but that is a bit harsh. A lot of people would want other's silenced because they don't like them. Heck, a lot of people don't like me, but that's life. However, there should be a small set of rules with a set of consequences when they are broken. If a user breaks a rule, they get a warning. If they break it again, they get suspended for 3 days and another warning. If they continue to be repeat offenders, we can impose a "three strikes, you're out" rule. However, the rules would need to be specific. If a rule states that you can't "stray off topic," that is a generality, since it is opinion about how far a topic can go until it is considered to be "off-topic." That is mickey-mouse shit. (See I just broke a vulgarity rule, so I will now get a warning). Many posters are outright trouble-makers. If a post is abusive towards any other member, that should not be tolerated. There is no reason to publicly abuse anyone else on a public forum. Take it to e-mail or PM's, but not where everyone else must wade through it. Those are just my suggestions, since obviously many people consider me to be a magnet for trouble.