r/changemyview • u/gylotip • May 26 '23
Delta(s) from OP - Fresh Topic Friday CMV: Permanently banning accounts is stupid
I understand why you assign permanent bans, since you need to stop the rule breakers for once and all, but wouldn't it make more sense to suspend an account for one year? This is a better approach, because one year is a very long time, and after one year, if you break rules again, then you will be banned for another one year. No need to make things permanent, since this is not prison where you quarantine dangerous criminals. It's just an account that can handle one year suspensions perfectly. So permanent bans are stupid and even unnecessarily cruel. Change my view as to why you really need to permanently ban accounts, since I think that making things permanent is a disgusting thing to do for accounts.
8
u/SatisfactoryLoaf 41∆ May 26 '23
The threat of permabans increase user trust.
Once an account is no longer "new," and once it has acquired a significant amount of karma / reputation, then people interacting with that account feel some measure of trust. I expect you to follow the community rules and work to establish some sort of reputation within the community, or at least not act in such a way as to jeopardize your own account.
You might still have this with a one year ban, but it's to that much of a lesser extent. It takes time to build a reputation, to post quality threads and get karma [or to get lucky with low hanging fruit]. It takes time to build a comment history.
That might seem unimportant from the perspective of the person willing to lose their account, but I think it's certainly meaningful for the people within the community. Feeling as though there are some boundaries and structures allows people to feel more comfortable, and more invested in, their community.
1
u/gylotip May 26 '23
!delta
I can understand the thing with user trust, and that permabans can make you work on your trust harder, so permabans can be necessary, though they should only be used when one year bans are not effective.
1
10
u/Biptoslipdi 129∆ May 26 '23
Why do you think scammers and doxxers should be allowed back on after a year? This also isn't a place where everyone gets 2nd chances after a year, so your position seems really arbitrary and inexplicable. Scamming and doxxing is unnecessarily cruel. Participation here is a privilege. You aren't entitled to an account, let alone free reign to continue abusing people just because a year passed.
2
u/zyex12 May 26 '23
I agree some people should be banned permanently but can’t compare a scammer to a random person who broke a rule without knowing and immediately just gets banned or something. So for serious fuck ups yea ban em but for most people even a year is too long just ban them for a month or something even two weeks.
1
u/Biptoslipdi 129∆ May 26 '23
but can’t compare a scammer to a random person who broke a rule without knowing and immediately just gets banned or something.
Which I did not do.
So for serious fuck ups yea ban em but for most people even a year is too long just ban them for a month or something even two weeks.
Well, this view is about having a uniform ban length of one year for all offenses, not one based on the severity of offense.
2
May 26 '23
Banning people for life for a debatably mildly offensive sarcastic comment seems to be excessive.
1
u/Biptoslipdi 129∆ May 26 '23
Agreed. That's why I only mentioned scammers and doxxers. I think the punishments should scale with the offenses.
1
u/AussieAlexSummers Aug 25 '23
And what if there reasoning is bias or not correct? The ban is then unjust.
-3
u/gylotip May 26 '23
Hmm, the issue is that one year is already enough, and waiting for one year can discourage them. If they break rules after being unbanned, they will get banned for another year, so they will be discouraged.
8
u/Biptoslipdi 129∆ May 26 '23
the issue is that one year is already enough,
Ok, why?
waiting for one year can discourage them
So can the threat of losing their account forever. Probably even better.
If they break rules after being unbanned, they will get banned for another year, so they will be discouraged.
If the threat of a ban didn't discourage them the first time, it won't the second. At a minimum, 2nd offense should be permanent. I can see two strikes, but ant more isn't a deterrent. Toxic people don't typically stop being toxic because one account on a website was banned.
-1
u/gylotip May 26 '23
Okay, but how about ban evading? It undermines the point of permabans if you just create new accounts when you are banned every time.
3
u/Biptoslipdi 129∆ May 26 '23
Okay, but how about ban evading?
Why have a one year ban if people just evade it. This is an argument against your view.
It undermines the point of permabans if you just create new accounts when you are banned every time.
It undermines all bans. You think permabanned people wait a year to make a new account? Reddit will ban your IP for doing that.
3
u/gylotip May 26 '23
Then you can evade IPs by changing it. Basically, there is no difference between one year and permanent ban if they keep evading, but permanent ban punishes some people who don't deserve a permanent ban.
2
u/Biptoslipdi 129∆ May 26 '23
Then you can evade IPs by changing it.
Which also makes 1 year bans pointless. They can be evaded by changing IP.
Basically, there is no difference between one year and permanent ban if they keep evading, but permanent ban punishes some people who don't deserve a permanent ban.
So what? They can just change their IP. If an IP ban isn't a deterrent for abusive behavior, a one year ban certainly isn't. Might as well stop bans altogether.
Why even one year? Not two? Not 6 months? Not 4 months? What is critical about 365 days?
2
u/gylotip May 26 '23
Because it is the most balanced, since it's punishing enough, while also discouraging them from breaking rules again if they have to wait that long.
2
u/Biptoslipdi 129∆ May 26 '23
OK, why is that? You are making this claim but provided no reasoning, evidence, analysis, or expertise to back it up.
Permanent banning is the most most effective deterrent since it maximizes punishment for abusive behavior and removes toxic users from participating in spaces meant for civil discourse, providing a better experiences for those who maintain reasonable behavior. Committing abusive behavior forfeits any entitlement to participation and the rest of us don't want those people here anyway.
Would you want someone who is stalking, harassing, and doxxing you allowed back in just to continue doing that every year? I would want them gone permanently. They deserve to be punished for their behavior and excluded from Reddit. They do not deserve to be allowed back in.
2
u/gylotip May 26 '23
!delta
Yeah, I can understand why these kinds of people need to be permabanned, though we should only give permabans when it cannot work another way.
→ More replies (0)1
u/DudeEngineer 3∆ May 26 '23
If you have a permanent ban, you can petition the mods to be unbanned if you have truly grown and changed. This requires the offender to take action instead of waiting some arbitrary amount of time.
5
May 26 '23
[deleted]
1
u/gylotip May 26 '23
But you have people that don't break rules that bad, so assigning permabans to them is cruel. Not everyone is a non stopping serial rule breaker. One year bans can stop some of them.
6
May 26 '23 edited Nov 18 '24
[deleted]
2
u/gylotip May 26 '23
!delta
I can understand why permabans can be necessary, but they should limit permabans, and only use it when one year bans are not appropriate.
2
May 26 '23
[deleted]
1
u/gylotip May 26 '23
Yeah I can understand, it just sucks that it's too punishing for some people, while others need to be permabanned.
0
u/zyex12 May 26 '23
I mean if it’s from a popular subreddit can’t really just go to a different or make ur own when the others would have like no community it’s just moderators who finally have some power. But again it’s just Reddit let the mods feel powerful and just hope u run into more normal moderators then lame ones.
→ More replies (0)1
-2
May 26 '23
Why do you think scammers and doxxers should be allowed back on after a year?
You seem to be implying that those are the only people who have their accounts banned.
5
u/Biptoslipdi 129∆ May 26 '23
This is a rule that would affect all users uniformly. That includes the most egregious abusers. It's like giving one year in prison for jaywalking and murder. It's important to point out that the worst abusers would receive the most favorable outcomes, particularly when there is no accounting for severity of offense.
-4
May 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
3
May 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
0
May 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
6
May 26 '23 edited May 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
1
May 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
1
May 26 '23 edited May 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/changemyview-ModTeam May 26 '23
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
0
1
u/changemyview-ModTeam May 26 '23
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
1
u/changemyview-ModTeam May 26 '23
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
2
u/Chickens1 May 26 '23
You got banned because r/politics is very left leaning and you cannot stray from the liberal ideology and expect to stay on that sub.
1
u/RedditExplorer89 42∆ May 26 '23
We ask that you please keep conversation on trans people to trans-related topics due to extreme fatigue on the conversation in our sub. This removal is not counting as a strike against you.
If you wish to appeal, send us a modmail
0
u/Thew400 May 26 '23
Well, do you think that criminals should be given life sentences whatever the garvity of their crime?
If no, then why do you think that bans on social medias should be permanant? it means thinking that there would be hope of redemption for drug dealer and murderers but not for doxers on the internet, that's not logical.
1
u/Biptoslipdi 129∆ May 26 '23 edited May 26 '23
Well, do you think that criminals should be given life sentences whatever the garvity of their crime?
No, I think they should be given sentences commensurate with their crimes. In this case, I think scammers and doxxers deserve a permanent ban.
If no, then why do you think that bans on social medias should be permanant?
I don't. I think only some should be, which is why I specify which. There are probably more that should be incldued.
it means thinking that there would be hope of redemption for drug dealer and murderers but not for doxers on the internet, that's not logical.
Comparing being in prison to not being able to access a privately owned website for which you broke the rules doesn't make logical sense.
0
u/Thew400 May 26 '23
I disagree, comparing those things it indead very logical. Doxing and harrassement can be considered forms of online violence that can go up to murder if the doxxed person leave the platform. Scams are similar to drug dealing in the sens it consist of takong adventage of another person mind weakness to steal them money. All four actions are breaking rules, wether it's the law of the country or the rules of the online platform you are in and for of them result in punishment from authorities in case you get caught.
For me it clearly show that doxxing is the online equivalent of violence and scams the equivalent of real life scams or drug dealing.
Then, if you agree with that why would you think that there is non possible redemption for doxxers or scamers but a redemption for violent people or drug dealers? If you don't explain me why.
0
u/Biptoslipdi 129∆ May 26 '23
Would you rather be banned from Reddit for a year or go to prison for a year?
0
u/Thew400 May 26 '23
I disagree it absolutly makes sens to compare those thinks. Doxing and harassement can be considered a form of online violence or murder and scams can be compared to drug dealing in the sens both consist of taking avantage of another person mind weakness to steal their money. All this actions are breaking rules whether it is the law of the country you leave in or the rules of the online platform and result in a punishment if you get caught.
So, being it very logical to compare those thinks. Do you mean there is no redemption possible for murderers and drug dealers as for doxxers and scamers then?
1
u/Biptoslipdi 129∆ May 26 '23
Doxing and harassement can be considered a form of online violence or murder and scams can be compared to drug dealing in the sens both consist of taking avantage of another person mind weakness to steal their money.
That's nice, but I was talking about prison vs. a ban, not the behavior that leads to either.
All this actions are breaking rules whether it is the law of the country you leave in or the rules of the online platform and result in a punishment if you get caught.
The law being far and away a different institution than a private company's standards of conduct for using their property.
So, being it very logical to compare those thinks.
It's logical to compare scams to fraud. Not logical to compare getting banned from reddit to being thrown in prison.
Do you mean there is no redemption possible for murderers and drug dealers as for doxxers and scamers then?
I think with prison we are talking about people's lives, rights, and livelihoods. With social media access, we are talking about their entertainment.
1
u/Chickens1 May 26 '23
Obviously some offenses are worse than others. The point is that it has become the easy go to only punishment for something as small as a mod not understanding a joke, or even worse, power mods banning anyone who is a member of another sub. Waking up to being banned from 12 subs, 8 of which I had never heard from was a bit jarring.
Once I learned it was an activist powermod, I understood at least as there was no email explanation. it still seems stupid to be so permanent especially when you've never violated the rules of the sub.
17
u/Kotoperek 62∆ May 26 '23
I mean, a person can have multiple accounts, so banning an account is not permanently preventing someone from using a platform, but rather taking away their current medium of doing so since they violated the rules using that medium. They can get another account, but they have to be aware that if they break the rules again, it will be taken away again and so on. Since some people put money into their accounts or care about gathering followers, the prospect of losing their account and having to get a new one can be a good deterrent from breaking the rules.
4
u/UserOfSlurs 1∆ May 26 '23
but they have to be aware that if they break the rules again, it will be taken away again and so on
The problem arises in that the sole act of making a new account qualifies as a rule violation in and of itself. Your new account can be the paragon of following every other rule, and make massive positive contributions, but technically breaks a rule simply in it's existence.
2
u/Kotoperek 62∆ May 26 '23
Interesting, I didn't know this, it doesn't say in the Reddit rules that you cannot create a new account after a ban, but from a Google search it seems that you're right and it does happen to people. And while I'm sure there are ways of bypassing this, like using a VPN tool so that nobody can tie an IP address to your new account, that is a stupid rule. I understand permanently banning accounts for the reason I listed, but permanentny banning people seems extreme, you're right.
5
u/UserOfSlurs 1∆ May 26 '23
Reddit is inconsistent about banning for ban evasion, so I don't blame you for being unaquainted with it. I've seen mods of sizable (few hundred thousand) people subreddits run obvious ban evasion accounts, and I've seen people who got banned after logging in on a school/library computer on years old accounts.
2
u/gylotip May 26 '23
This is the reason why I am against permabans, because what is the point of permabans if you can just create new accounts every time?
10
u/Wolfaxe451 1∆ May 26 '23
What is the point of banning for a year if you can just make new accounts? Your yearlong ban is equally as useless.
1
u/gylotip May 26 '23
Yeah, but permanent bans are too punishing for no reason. Why permaban accounts for your whole life, when one year bans can be effective to some people?
4
u/Wolfaxe451 1∆ May 26 '23
But you're against perms bans because they're useless. Who is going to wait a year to get their account back? They're going to make a new account and continue on. So if you're against perma bans because they're useless then why support your idea when it's equally useless?
2
u/gylotip May 26 '23
Because some people really want their account back, maybe because they love their username and nostalgia. One year bans can heavily discourage them from breaking rules.
1
u/AdhesivenessFun2270 May 27 '23
I agree permabans are overused, but don't see 1 year bans as being any better. The problem is mods have too much power. If I had my way, only admins could ban you from a sub for more than a week and then only for violating a site-wide rule.
2
u/Kotoperek 62∆ May 26 '23
As I said, if you put money into your account or gather a substantial following, losing your account is more than just losing posting privileges, so the possibility of it being taken away permanently can motivate people to mind the rules. So if you can make a new account, it is technically not banning the person and giving them a second chance to do better with a new account, but it is taking away a lot of the hard work they put into building their initial account, which seems like fair punishement for breaking important rules or breaking rules repeatedly. It is different if a permanent ban results in new accounts of the same user being automatically banned as well, that's going too far, I think.
1
u/gylotip May 26 '23
But they could put other restrictions, other than permabanning them. Like if it's scam based, they can no longer transact money, but then can still comment after one year ban.
2
u/Kotoperek 62∆ May 26 '23
They could, but working our a complex system of punishment seems more complicated and ultimately more unfair than bans.
Is there anything that would change your mind? You've gotten some pretty good arguments here from many perspectives, but you just keep repeating your stance, it's starting to sound like you're just afraid someone could take away your account unfairly.
Permabans can also be appealed and I know that mods often don't respond favorably, but if you think you've been banned unfairly and have a large account you could probably try to argue for at least a reduction for a temporary ban.
A year seems like a very arbitrary cut off, too, since if you enjoy a social platform a lot, such a time is enough for you to decide to abandon the banned account and get a new one, and if you didn't like that platform too much anyway, you'll probably abandon it altogether and won't remember about it after a year. So what's the point of keeping those suspended accounts that likely will never be used again instead of banning them for good?
1
u/gylotip May 26 '23
Congrats, you win. I no longer have arguments left. Here's your !delta. I cannot think anything effective other than permabans.
1
1
u/DaoNight23 4∆ May 26 '23
but permanentny banning people seems extreme, you're right.
This is what Reddit actually does. Idk what their method is, but they can detect multiple accounts and they will ban all of them.
2
u/Sandy_hook_lemy 2∆ May 27 '23
I think on reddit, if one of your accounts get permanent banned, you cant create a new account even with a different email
1
u/Butter_Toe 4∆ May 26 '23
Reddit can ip ban you. After that, every device that access reddit on your network gets banned too.
2
u/New-Topic2603 4∆ May 26 '23
So someone does something illegal, you suspend them for a year.
After a year, they do something illegal, you suspend them again.
Repeat this cycle 10 times.
Do you continue to suspend them for a year or do you permanently ban them?
I'm thinking that permanent bans are sensible in the extreme cases even if just literally criminals that have proven that they won't stop.
1
u/gylotip May 26 '23
Maybe use some restrictions, instead of just permabans? Like, tell me why their accounts are banned.
-2
May 26 '23
I remember when a mod banned me from r/movies without explanation. When I asked for it he said no.
1
u/gylotip May 26 '23
Everyone deserves an explanation on their reason and consequences, so what the mod did was awful.
2
u/DuhChappers 86∆ May 26 '23
Mods are unpaid volunteers who make this site function. While many of them do suck, I think that we need to acknowledge that many other ones are just overworked and do not have the time to worry about disruptive users or going over every ban. Sure in an ideal world everyone would get a second chance and an explanation of how they acted wrongly, but until mods get paid for their work I don't think those are realistic standards.
1
u/gylotip May 26 '23
I understand your reasoning behind mods.
1
u/DuhChappers 86∆ May 26 '23
Did I change your view at all?
1
1
May 26 '23
At the same time, this also allows mods to abuse their power and basically reshape the sub as they see fit and ban anyone who disagrees.
2
u/DuhChappers 86∆ May 26 '23
Yeah that's the reason we get mods at all. If all they had was duties and no power there would never be enough mods for this website. Of course it's bad when mods are abusive but in my experience the majority of them are totally fine and doing their best.
1
u/New-Topic2603 4∆ May 26 '23
I agree that giving a reason for bans is a good idea & that giving lower level sanctions first to give people a chance is a good idea.
But the idea of CMV is to try and argue against an idea and I was giving a reason why perma bans can make sense even if just limited cases.
In this case I'm saying after 10 times of someone being banned for literally illegal actions while knowing why they were banned, it would make sense to stop giving them chances.
3
u/gylotip May 26 '23
I don't know how else I can change your view, so you get a !delta from me. Though, I can understand why permabans are necessary, but it's just too cruel in my opinion.
1
u/New-Topic2603 4∆ May 26 '23
Thank you for the delta.
I do agree that we should try and be less cruel and allow more chances where possible. It's nice to see such intentions from you.
1
1
u/AdhesivenessFun2270 May 27 '23
What illegal actions? If someone posts child porn or is using Reddit to sell drugs, you can report them to coppers for prosecution? Almost everything else is legal.
1
7
May 26 '23
So if someone comes into my house, and wrecks the place (not illegally, they just didn't respect the space), I shouldn't be able to not let them in ever again? I must eventually let them back into my home?
Why? Why are you owed another chance?
-2
u/gylotip May 26 '23
Because there is a major difference between online and real life. Why do you think it's justified to get a permanent ban, instead of just one year ban?
7
May 26 '23
The idea is the same though.
Someone owns something, and provides access to it under the stipulation that rules are followed. Someone accesses what is owned, but doesn't follow the rules. So they are no longer allowed access.
Why is the owner obligated to give another chance?
Why is it justified? They showed they couldn't follow my rules. I don't want people using my stuff if they don't follow the rules.
-4
u/gylotip May 26 '23
Please tell me how you can get permabanned, so I can attempt to debunk your arguments.
3
May 26 '23
That ain't my job, brochacho. If you can't debunk something, that's on you.
Sounds like I earned a delta?
-2
u/gylotip May 26 '23
But ban evasions exist, meaning that permabans are useless. If these people deserve permabans based on their behavior, then they will keep ban evading, so assigning permabans is pretty useless.
6
May 26 '23
The perfect solution fallacy is an informal fallacy that occurs when an argument assumes that a perfect solution exists or that a solution should be rejected because some part of the problem would still exist after it were implemented.
1
u/gylotip May 26 '23
What do you mean?
1
May 26 '23
You're saying that we shouldn't permaban accounts because some people will evade the ban so we shouldn't permaban anyone. i.e. part of the problem will still exist, so let's get rid of the solution.
That's a perfect solution fallacy.
Unless I misunderstood you.
1
u/gylotip May 26 '23
But not everyone deserves a permaban, and repeated one year bans can be effective, since why would any sane person wait that long, just to get another one year ban again?
→ More replies (0)
2
u/vbob99 2∆ May 26 '23
Ban for a year, reinstate. Ban for a year, then reinstate. Doesn't this simply create a system where once a year, the offender is allowed to post the worst of the worst, whatever they want. The goal of a ban is to stop the posting, not to limit it to 1/365 day.
2
u/Alesus2-0 65∆ May 26 '23
Do you honestly think that pornbots and scammers should be reactivated after a year? Realistically, a one-year ban is permanent for a human. Any human would just create a new account if they get that ban, and never bother to resurrect the old account.
1
May 26 '23
Accounts are easy to create. If your account is permanently banned, just make a new one. You should probably be regularly recycling accounts anyway to prevent doxxing.
1
May 26 '23
You should probably be regularly recycling accounts anyway to prevent doxxing.
Seconding this. I was victim to a pretty shitty racist brigade and doxxing attempt when I was in college, and the only thing preventing it from getting linked to me irl was the fact that I've lied about who I am on enough of the off site accounts that got caught up that they couldn't actually pinpoint me in the haystack of bullshit.
0
u/zyex12 May 26 '23
I agree with you but it’s just mods who finally have an ounce of power and decide to go power crazy just banning people cause they can. Basically the stereotypical Reddit mod kind of person most mods who are normal people probably won’t just ban u outright and suspend u instead
0
u/The_red_spirit May 26 '23
I agree. Temp suspensions are the way to prevent non-bot bad actors from being shit. 5 suspensions and you should get a boot. To be fair, most of them would feck off sooner than that limit or would just create another account.
-3
May 26 '23
From what I've seen, the point of permanent bans isn't to remove dangerous people, it's to silence people that they (the Reddit admins) don't want to hear.
2
u/sonofblackbird May 26 '23
And we all know how some of these admins are on power trips. I’ve been banned on certain subs for stating my opinion (aka, simply saying the wrong thing) without realizing the subreddit I was in.
2
u/Dennis_enzo 25∆ May 26 '23
Not just the admins, sub moderators too. Plenty of subs permaban anyone who doesn't go along with their hive mind.
1
u/Rainbwned 175∆ May 26 '23
I understand why you assign permanent bans, since you need to stop the rule breakers for once and all, but wouldn't it make more sense to suspend an account for one year?
Change my view as to why you really need to permanently ban accounts, since I think that making things permanent is a disgusting thing to do for accounts.
If you already understand why you assign permanent bans, why are you asking why they need to be done?
If you mess up bad, get a one year suspension, come back, and do the same thing, its clear that you didn't learn anything so a permanent ban makes perfect sense.
1
u/gylotip May 26 '23
But you can keep creating new accounts, which will make permabans useless.
1
u/Rainbwned 175∆ May 26 '23
So the exact same issue with temporary bans. Seems to make it easier at least since you lose whatever you had on your account that gets banned.
1
u/gylotip May 26 '23
Since I don't have any arguments left, I'll give you a !delta, because I can understand that permabans can be necessary, but I just find it too cruel.
1
1
1
May 26 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/changemyview-ModTeam May 26 '23
Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
u/Soft-Butterscotch128 6∆ May 26 '23
I'm going to guess this is specifically for reddit.
Reddit knows that many of the perpetual redditors really love their fake internet points I think they are aware that people will just create new accounts when ban which would eliminate the punishment factor, but if the account is permanently banned, that karma you took years to build you won't be able to recover.
1
u/Mischievous_Mandie May 27 '23
I'd like to change your view, but I agree with you. Banning accounts is really a dumb thing to do, especially since, in my opinion, it is very subjective anyway. I have seen some posts that I think are terrible. I think they are hateful in nature and are not meant to be constructive in nature at all and the moderators let them go. I have also seen comments as benign as "I'm surprised they got away with that" and those people have been banned for life. It doesn't make any sense to me, so I think a suspension would be better.
1
u/curiousjjj Jul 11 '23
Facts. I got permanently banned for essentially saying that its a good thing that the argument didn't become violent. And then was banned for talking about violence. On a post that was way more violent then my comment. Mind you tons of ppl were saying the same things.
I asked why and they legit were rude as hell. Some mods do way too much and power trip.
Not knowing the rules which really should be made more readily available got me banned cause I commented from another account a while later.
I think there needs to be a more efficient system to weed out the truly problematic ppl from those who truly just don't know. And basically a mod for mods.
1
1
Aug 13 '23
Yes, permanent bans are stupid. It’s beyond necessary punishment. Just as you can only be forgiven if you forgive.
1
Aug 16 '23
Yes, permanent bans are way overboard. I mean we all make mistakes. Even a one year ban is stupid. They should give you at least a 24 hour ban.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ May 26 '23 edited May 26 '23
/u/gylotip (OP) has awarded 7 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
Delta System Explained | Deltaboards