An interesting point. A few questions follow that may help to clarify the situation with MFTP and to inform other members about posting and communication guidelines at CIK.
@Samseau for your consideration:
1. Was MFTP given a second temp ban while already serving a current temp ban? If so, this will seem unfair from the perspective of a few members, depending on how they view the severity of the second infringement.
> Either way, what is the CIK mod policy or rationale on this retroactive multi-ban process?
It may be worthwhile to make this policy clear to all members, perhaps with an update to the forum rules page. The number of CIK members are inherently limited (unless someone volunteers to action a sustained multi-media marketing campaign). So, addressing this issue may be more important compared to responding to individual issues within another, larger community.
2. This situation raises another question as referenced by RL:
Does the CIK forum setup allow a temp banned member to PM or otherwise contact CIK admin/mods (e.g., to directly appeal a temp ban)?
> If not, this feature may be worth considering if it is feasible.
> If so, this could eliminate or reduce the desire to create a secondary account and to communicate a plea through another member. In any case...
> Is a temp banned member able to continue an existing conversation but not to create a new one? These threads suggest that this is true, however they are quite old:
https://xenforo.com/community/threa...rom-replying-to-existing-conversations.55187/ &
https://xenforo.com/community/threads/block-personal-conversation.24106/
Broader Thoughts
I would encourage any temp banned member to consider (a) taking maximum ownership of their actions and (b) clarifying their wider intentions, even if they disagree with the mod on the issue of the temp ban.
It's perfectly understandable that members, including myself, would want to rebuke a temp ban if we believed it was unjust. It's still important to balance this with taking responsibility and thinking about the bigger picture. This does not mean that we should just shut up and take it; rather, it means that it's possible to voice our opinion and disagree in a calm manner, while simultaneously self-reflecting and keeping our larger purpose in view.
My Experience. I got temp banned on RVF 2.0 a couple of times. Most recently, it was for posting a satirical GIF and a few words of mockery in response to an arrogant post by an obvious sock puppet account. The puppet account gloated with incredible condescension at my temp ban, but then got perma banned. My insight was vindicated yet my temp ban remained. I thought my temp ban was both excessive and misplaced. I felt a strong need to "have my say" and show everyone "who was right". After my ban lapsed, I took a breath and decided that (a) it wasn't worth it, and (b) I am OK to keep posting without mocking others via GIFs as a reasonable compromise if it meant maintaining my account and connection to the community.
Takeaway. If a member engages in X posting behaviour (e.g., plagiarism) and they get temp banned for it, then they may benefit from considering that they should only continue to engage in X behaviour if that truly is the hill they're willing to get banned on. Justifying why X behaviour is actually OK to repeat doing, or trying to twist the meaning of X behaviour, is probably not going to help in keeping their account.
Conclusion. If a mod can see that a temp banned member is able to adjust his attitude and behaviour following a warning, it's probably going to increase the likelihood that the mod will review other unrelated future infractions with more charity. Conversely, if a temp ban -- let alone multiple temp bans -- seem to have little to no influence on a member's posting behaviour, this will probably indicate to the mod that a longer or a permanent solution is needed to eliminate the unwanted behaviour. I hope this helps.
Last edited:
