Jump to content

Unreserved Apology To GoodGurl


Featured Posts

 

Would you suggest the members previous behaviour was not taken into account when reviewing the possibility reducing the duration of a ban?

 

- There has been no significant change to the site rules, which would affect the review process.

 

 

Daniel

 

I would agree with you had you said that 'a review of the 'term' of the ban and a possible parole could be offered' - however, your post said that you would 'review the reasons for the ban, which would suggest looking at : 'was banning person X for action YY the correct course of action ?'

 

If all of the bans were warranted and in accordance with the rules, and those rules have not been relaxed, then there would appear to be little to be gained by offering to revisit the ban, and all that will happen is that those ex-members will be refused a new membership.

  • Greenie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant't help agreeing! I have had a couple of these moments.

My own fault for clumsiness. One of my ways to approach a problem is to DRAFT a reply to an email and say exactly what I think - highly subjective and no holds barred to get it off my chest - then SAVE it to the DRAFT folder.

Then return after I have calmed down and then rewrite it with objective words of tact and diplomacy - then send it.

Those of you one step ahead of me, have already guessed where things can go wrong here - by clicking on the 'Send' button at the offensive draft stage, instead of the 'Save' button. - Whoops!

Absolutely - and prevent the possibility of sending the angry draft by deleting the recipients name from the "to" tab, until you re-write!

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Thank you for taking the time to post the above, let me try and reply to it.

 

Your reading of 'bangate' is as per my own and as you suggest,I think its fair to say that a significant majoirty of the members understand that action was needed, to avoid detriment to the forum. The level of action required in each specific case is to an extent always something which could be debated, however members also need to consider that not all of the members banned where banned for their conduct on the public board. Members have also been banned for personal attack on moderators following lesser action or otherwise, as well as for continued abuse of the mod-que system, where large volumes of inapprpate posts where posted to the forum but never seen by the public, leading to otherwise lesser or short-term action being exculated to a ban after the last public content was posted.

 

All of the site staff, myself included, run the staff as volenteers and in many cases are not formally trained in, for instance, conflict managment. As such it is not perfect, and I will hold my hand up to that, we do the best we can with the resource we have. If where where a commertial site staff would go on paid training courses in all sorts of things, we are not.

 

You have worded it better than I have, however it is my intention over the next few weeks to review all banned members banded around the time we are talking about, if only for my own peice of mind.

I have a significant list of things I would like to review over the coming months, and am working through it as best I can in the pockets of time I have avilable to do so, around my wider lift outside of the site.

 

 

Daniel

 

So that's all settled, isn't it?

 

Well done, Dan, you've accepted every important point raised, and outlined how you're going to do it.

 

I, for one, would like to see an end to all this introverted nit-picking, and more discussion about boats.

 

 

Sewer tubes are rubbish, and cassettes are better than stupid holding tanks - anyone disagree?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In extreme cases where external spammers or banned members have repeatedly created new or duplicate accounts with the primary or sole intention of causing trouble on the forum in retaliation to the ban or otherwise, we have blocked specific IP addresses or very small ranges from being able to register a new account, to protect the site from this attack.

As far as I am aware we have not banned any IP addresses from accessing the site to view it or sign in using an existing account, however if this is not the case I will look into this.

 

Daniel

I trust that care is taken to ensure that the IP address really is unique to the poster in question. Only a small number of people have a fixed IP usually in order to run other services from or via the address concerned. Most internet access is via an ISP that assigns one or more of its own IPs to the individual conversation. Banning an IP address in this case would deny access to all ( or many) users having the same ISP, which might account for why some people have not received info that was supposedly sent to them.
Link to post
Share on other sites

unplug your router a few times or overnight and you can obtain a new one, simple.

 

I dont think you can ever stop someone from creating a new profile or viewing the forum as a guest, with the above method or simply using a proxy you can work your way around it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

unplug your router a few times or overnight and you can obtain a new one, simple.

 

I dont think you can ever stop someone from creating a new profile or viewing the forum as a guest, with the above method or simply using a proxy you can work your way around it.

Not always. My Virgin cable modem gives a static IP address. The only way I have found to change it was when I got a new router.

 

I have experimented with switching it off overnight and it just comes back with the same IP address every time I switch it back on. I presume other cable modems operate similarly.

 

Of course using another device on 3 or 4g (not wi fi) does allow you to view as a guest as that doesn't go via. a router.

Edited by MJG
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Not necessarily. Dan wrote about banning IP ranges, meaning when you restart yoyr router and get a new one, it will almost certainly being the same range of addresses.

Or in my case, exactly the same one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be the external IP address, not the internal address. To find your external address Google what's my IP and it will show you.


Most people have numerous devices these days so blocking an IP address or subnet is a waste of time. I have a fixed address at home but could connect through a mifi or one of many phones over 3\4G or pop to McDonald's and use their WiFi or use one of the many vpn\proxy solutions available on the internet if I wanted to present another address.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Not necessarily. Dan wrote about banning IP ranges, meaning when you restart yoyr router and get a new one, it will almost certainly being the same range of addresses.

 

I think you will find that is incorrect. With any reasonable size landline ISP the chances of pick a new one up in a batch range is small. Even on your mobile I suspect it is unlikely try it and see.

Not always. My Virgin cable modem gives a static IP address. The only way I have found to change it was when I got a new router.

 

I have experimented with switching it off overnight and it just comes back with the same IP address every time I switch it back on. I presume other cable modems operate similarly.

 

Of course using another device on 3 or 4g (not wi fi) does allow you to view as a guest as that doesn't go via. a router.

 

Virgin is a particular oddity, I seem to remember each of there lines is linked to a static IP. Virgin can change it for you but they normally want a good reason :) I would have thought the VPN route might be your answer.

 

 

Out of interest, how does one determine the IP address of one's router?

 

Google whatsmy IP that will tell you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dan,

 

I am somewhat heartened at your good intentions here.

 

I do very much appreciate that this is a situation that arises when people voluntarily run something that they don't necessarily have the full range of skills that they might need if employed to do this.

 

I've been there myself. I am part of the team that runs a major free genealogy site, and when it goes wrong and people criticise it is very easy to adopt a siege mentality, draw the wagons into a circle and defend the core team who did their best, because it really isn't done to say to somebody who is a volunteer that their work wasn't good enough.

 

Conflict management is hard. Performance managing volunteers is an order of magnitude harder.

 

The best thing here is that each and every mod needs to take a brutally honest look at their actions and ask the right question.

 

The right question is NOT "was I right", but "did what I did have a good effect"

 

It is all very well being right, but if the patient dies from the treatment,.....

If I could give you a greenie for this, I would. You are spot on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Yes but it is only fair on Dan for us to be clear about what we are asking for.

 

So we are asking for:

 

1) Bans to be reviewed independently

2) Threads unlocked or good reason given

3) Current affairs section to be reinstated

4) Transparent fair moderating going forward (Whatever that means - anyone care to expand on the details of 'transparent and fair'?)

 

Anything else, anyone?

 

Any changes to the Forum Rules and Guidelines?

 

Who is this we? It isn't me.

 

  • Greenie 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Out of interest, how does one determine the IP address of one's router?

On my virgin router I can log in to it via my browser and see and change various settings. One of the settings I can see (but as I say not change) is the IP address.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't ban IP ranges. Doing so would prevent access for many users and new users alike. As a slight aside, even with 3,706,452,992 public IPv4 addresses, it's not uncommon for dynamically assigned addresses to be recycled and later used by another member, at least geographically.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't ban IP ranges. Doing so would prevent access for many users and new users alike. Even with 3,706,452,992 public IPv4 addresses, it's not uncommon for dynamically assigned addresses in the UK to be recycled and later used by another member.

OK but Dan further up (post #143)said you do ban small ranges sometimes as per quote below.

 

"we have blocked specific IP addresses or very small ranges from being able to register a new account, to protect the site from this attack."

 

So I am confused which is correct.

Edited by churchward
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.