Forum Rules and Guidelines Discussion

The draft rules and guidelines say:
"Bannings will not be considered an option unless all other means fail (with the exception of members joining for the main purpose of trolling)."

I think that's far preferable to banning people based on a subjective view that they're "obnoxious".

I can't see that it is possible to moderate the forum without making subjective decisions. In my experience every case was different, there was no way to devise a manual to cover every contingency. For example, we even had one member who slid into advocating consensual sex with children! Obviously something had to be done to stop that, but equally it was a subjective decision. Even deciding if someone has joined with the main purpose of trolling is subjective - they are not going announce the fact!

Unless you have a screening process as people join, you will probably get a lot of troublesome members - sometimes bunched together. On Skeptiko, Alex communicates with new members by email before deciding whether to let them in. I would recommend that Laird does the same if the software permits.

David

I can't see that it is possible to moderate the forum without making subjective decisions.

Yes of course, but what I was objecting to was the idea of banning someone because of a subjective view that they were "obnoxious".

I can't see that it is possible to moderate the forum without making subjective decisions. In my experience every case was different, there was no way to devise a manual to cover every contingency. For example, we even had one member who slid into advocating consensual sex with children! Obviously something had to be done to stop that, but equally it was a subjective decision. Even deciding if someone has joined with the main purpose of trolling is subjective - they are not going announce the fact!

Unless you have a screening process as people join, you will probably get a lot of troublesome members - sometimes bunched together. On Skeptiko, Alex communicates with new members by email before deciding whether to let them in. I would recommend that Laird does the same if the software permits.

David

Dave, do you not realise why many of us left Skeptiko ? (for some reason my reply has joined together with Dave's post)

Because you are a troublesome member, Tim.

Because you are a troublesome member, Tim.

I'll give you troublesome when I start harping on about Pam Reynolds.... again

I'll give you troublesome when I start harping on about Pam Reynolds.... again

You just try it!!!

Take it from Tim Coleman, BBC Journalist.  His interview with Pam was used in Leslie Kean's recent book. (he doesn't quite get it right but the result is the same)

http://www.timcolemanmedia.com/index.php...m-reynolds

You are just proving my point. This thread is Forum Rules and Guidelines, not Tim presents more evidence for Pam Reynolds! 

I've started a proper thread for you, Tim. Under NDEs.