Sin binning grapes instead of banning completely?

[bearded bloke]

Good here init

[taff]

you're all very reassuring, I feel like my posts are in safe hands......

[SarzWix]

I've opened the door of this thread, peeked in, and now I'm just going to back out quietly, and pull the door to behind me...

[snohare]

Sounds like this conversation has peeked...

(Is that the sound of slamming doors and running feet I hear ? )

[Florence Fennel]

Shaking head and smiling. Only on the Vine, only on the Vine. Can't imagine what it's going to be like in the Gardener's Rest this year.

[Newton]

Who were the last 5 to be banned then? And what were their offences......I remember the artificial light grower!

[FionaH]

Most bans are spammers Newton.

[zazen999]

Believe it or not, we would never parade them across the page.

If anyone has a problem with how the mods mod; then they can go to 'forum leaders' at the bottom of the front page, and select one of the non-mods and send a PM to them to explain their concerns.

We have a thread that is onrunning on the 'other side' of the board, which we post our concerns on, and we discuss current situations and appropriate action. The Admin team regularly observe and comment on this, and any 'serious issues' are referred to them for a final decision. Sometimes we take action fast and let the others know later; if it is an issue of personal safety or the like. But that is more removing of posts rather than any actual banning.

As said in my first reply, we would never just ban a long or medium standing member without extensive discussion and consultation; and several 'behind the scenes' conversations with them.

[SarzWix]

Believe it or not, we would never parade them across the page.

Exactly. Moderating-in-public just doesn't happen in the majority of cases, except an occasional gentle reminder of the rules where necessary. What might seem like an instant-ban, has usually been preceded with communication behind the scenes. The exceptions being obvious spammers and repeat-registering trolls. And we have methods of finding out who they are before they're banned..

[snohare]

Is it true that trolls who make overly inflammatory comments always burn their bridges as far as access is concerned ?

Whatever the mods do, it works. The proof is in how peaceful and yet open the communication here is.

[Snadger]

Is it true that trolls who make overly inflammatory comments always burn their bridges as far as access is concerned ?
...................

Trolls and bridges always go together as far as I know?

[veggiechicken]

Trolls and bridges always go together as far as I know?

So are the Mods the equivalent of the Three Billy Goats Gruff?

[Nicos]

Hmm...ya get all sorts on here- hadn't you noticed????

[bearded bloke]

So are the Mods the equivalent of the Three Billy Goats Gruff?

Nah,there are more nannies than billies

[HeyWayne]

So are the Mods the equivalent of the Three Billy Goats Gruff?

No, they are all luffly.

Having had a brief tenure as "one of them" I can honestly say that my own "diplomacy" was pushed to its limits once, and after repeated attempts to have a certain individual "chill" I was left with no option but to ban them. The only one (spamorons aside) that I banned.

Where would we be without rules?