There's always going to be a member others can't stand

[Katrina]

Yep, my forum has a member or two that the others can't stand. But unless they keep violating the rules to the extent that they ban themselves out, then they're there to stay. Do they know how to walk the line? Absolutely.

What would happen if one of these disliked guys leaves? There will always be someone else that members complain about.

Do you crack down harder on the member(s) that the majority don't like? Or do you see the value of every member the site has even though some have less value than others?

 

[Ghost]

Whenever I have ever started a community, I have always had some sort of rule about antagonizing other members, repeatedly doing something that bothers others, etc. It essentially means "Hey, if you annoy enough people, you can leave." Of course, that entirely relies on the administration / moderators not taking advantage of that hard-to-define rule, but I think at times it is necessary. I haven't been on your forum and I don't know your rules, but I wonder what your members would think if someone came to the forums to debate on the validity of Christianity - or any religion. Even if they are well articulated, not angry, and genuinely sharing their thoughts and feelings, it can be difficult to deal with. Imagine this - If your most annoying user suddenly invited 100 friends, would it still be the community you want? If I create a forum about Xbox and there's a guy always trying to convince people to play PC games, should I ban him? Well, he might not be breaking the rules, but they're not really contributing with the spirit of the rules and community in mind. If they invited 100 of their friends who also only play PC, all of a sudden I might have a PC forum instead of an Xbox forum.

That's how I like to look at it anyway... Even if they aren't breaking specific rules, are they deterring other members from joining? Are they derailing threads or causing members to reply to them instead of contributing to an otherwise solid discussion? If that's true, maybe they should go...

Every member should be treated fairly, but that doesn't always translate to it being equal.
It's the classic "BUT WHEN THOMAS DID IT HE ONLY GOT SUSPENDED FOR A DAY" argument, to which the school principle replies, "Jimmy, this is your third disruption this year. You agreed to not yell in class."
In Jimmy's mind, he's unfairly suspended for a week while Thomas was only suspended for a day - perhaps for the same sort of disruption.
But in the eyes of the administration and other students, it would be unfair to Thomas if Jimmy was only suspended for one day because of his previous incidents. I think that's what comes into play a lot when members feel unfairly punished, but sometimes it's not possible to just say "this behavior = this punishment". That's my philosophy anyways... Repeat offenders get treated differently. It might not be equal on the day of their banning/suspension, but I can always attempt to make sure it's fair. "Fair - Not Equal"

 

[Katrina]

@Ghost, are you suggesting that the mob should get their way on a site because they are the majority regardless of rules? I think your first paragraph is leaning that way for the sake of the entire good?

If that's the case, then I have reservations about that because members come and go on a site so maybe the mob would be a different group in 6 months and might not like someone else...should they have the power to eliminate a user as well?

 

[Ghost]

@Ghost, are you suggesting that the mob should get their way on a site because they are the majority regardless of rules? I think your first paragraph is leaning that way for the sake of the entire good?

If that's the case, then I have reservations about that because members come and go on a site so maybe the mob would be a different group in 6 months and might not like someone else...should they have the power to eliminate a user as well?

No, I don't think the mob should have control over that. I think it's more about the community you want to have and whether or not the member is disrupting that vision or helping it. It's not always so black and white, so let's use FP as an example. If a user comes here and is constantly discouraging users from making a forum because it's hard to be successful and make money, are they a positive member of the community? They might not swear, spam, harass, etc, so they wouldn't be banned on FP I suppose... But that's where I think there can be some well thought out decisions on the part of moderators and administrators. Sometimes there are members who follow every rule, but still manage to negatively impact the community and all I am trying to say is that I normally have a rule which broadly prevents that from being allowed. Something along the lines of excessive criticism of others, or excessive debating / arguing (even if done maturely) can be negative for the community and is disallowed.

I don't think my words should be interpreted to say a group of users can get someone else banned for simply not liking them. If there's a user who is not breaking any sort of rule, but still is disliked, I don't think they should be banned. However, there should also be rules in place that give admins some leniency when it comes to this, so users who constantly bother the community can be removed ethically. It's more about their intentions rather than what users think. A user could be loved by the community, but still have a negative impact when they post, so they could be banned even though the "mob" loves them. Or the mob could hate them, but they're not actually doing anything to merit all the hatred, so they won't be banned.

If a user is disliked because they are actually disrupting the community, there's most likely a rule that they are breaking. If they are not causing disruptions or being abundantly annoying and are still disliked, maybe some of the "mob" is actually breaking harassment rules if they're constantly bickering with the person they don't like.

 

[Katrina]

Do you think a member has a chance for reform through mentoring instead of getting rid of him?

 

[Shannon Apple]

I find that when I user isn't liked by the majority, there is usually a good reason.

We've only had to permaban one person and it was pretty much that guy. He skirted around the rules for about 10 years. Then Donald Trump got into office. It was almost like he suddenly got validation for his hatred and alt-rightness. The reason he skirted around the rules for years was that while he was quite racist, sexist and other things, the members usually put him back in his box. He never went far enough to get banned, just staying on the inside of what was tolerable. He might have gotten a few warnings here and there. The whole forum disliked him, left and right wing members alike. He also thought that because we started a new forum, it would be different and more tolerable to his behaviour. He said it many times "I thought this site was supposed to be different than A4." All of our staff are not left-wing, yet because of his extremism, he was sure we were. lol.

So, when the Ariana Grande concert got bombed, he used that as an excuse to be a horrible human being. I removed him from the Current Events section and told him to have some respect for the families of those killed or injured. Of course he brought up my religion and I was like "Um... no. Being a Christian does not mean that I should follow on the side of hatred. Who does that help?" So... he comes back with this really long winded PM about how the Native Americans had it coming. He sent that PM to several members of the forum thinking he was in the right. They were laughing. When I logged on the next day, I had several messages on Skype laughing at the absurdness of the PM. I was like "What PM?" They all had it read before I did. When I posted that in the mod forum, one of our other admins who happens to be a Native North American banned him on the spot. It became a case of "okay, that's it, enough is enough." I was so angry myself, I couldn't even read that PM without seeing red. After a few weeks, I went back and read it again with a calm eye and saw why other people were laughing. It was completely nuts.

It's more a point of how much the staff is willing to tolerate. Getting rid of him actually killed forum drama completely. The other side of it was that the forum went kinda quiet because there was no one creating drama for people to fight or laugh about. Double-edged sword really. But... the community did want him gone, just kinda took away their entertainment at the same time. While we didn't see the funny side, many of them did. lol

 

[Katrina]

Have you had a member that the community couldn't stand at first and then grew to tolerate after a while...but then actually grew fond of? CH has had that too 😀

 

[Ghost]

Have you had a member that the community couldn't stand at first and then grew to tolerate after a while...but then actually grew fond of? CH has had that too 😀

Ha, pretty sure I have been that member at times... @Princess MeowsePad what do you think? :/

I think people can definitely change with age, experience, and willingness to adapt. Some people stay stuck for a while though.

 

[Katrina]

Ha, pretty sure I have been that member at times... @Princess MeowsePad what do you think? :/

I think people can definitely change with age, experience, and willingness to adapt. Some people stay stuck for a while though.

Maybe we all come to realize we're just one great big dysfunctional family? 😀

 

[Shannon Apple]

Have you had a member that the community couldn't stand at first and then grew to tolerate after a while...but then actually grew fond of? CH has had that too 😀

Oh yes.

Years ago, we had a trio of 16-year old girls that literally gave us hell. They become known among the staff as "The Triad of Drama Hell." One of them was disqualified for cheating in an art contest and even got her mother on to it to try and get the moderator who disqualified her banned. They started messaging the site owner. Instead, he got promoted to admin and I was made super mod to replace him. lmao. You should have seen the reaction.

Now, about 11 years later, those same girls are well liked by the staff. Well, two of them are still lurking around. They even find their own past behaviour funny. XD.

 

[kode_block]

Do you crack down harder on the member(s) that the majority don't like? Or do you see the value of every member the site has even though some have less value than others?

I can't necessarily say as I've never had to deal with those types of people. Besides, I'm not really a Forum-Administrator anymore as I've stopped running my own Forums and now prefer to work for other Forums.

But would I crack-down hard on Members, who are bugging the hell out of my Community and making people unhappy? Yes, I would come down hard on those Members and would only give them one chance before it's either a really long Account-Suspension or a permanent Deletion of their Account.

Yes, I know. It sounds harsh but that's how I work. I'm a strict person when it comes to people who are a nuisance to Communities. And I will do all they can to make them stop.

 

[Tucker933]

It's pretty rare that we get members others don't like, but when we do, the current base knows how to push the buttons of that user 'till they snap and start breaking rules. Eventually they quit on their own or get banned.

It's actually a pretty healthy environment because people either learn to improve or they leave.

 

[Katrina]

It's pretty rare that we get members others don't like, but when we do, the current base knows how to push the buttons of that user 'till they snap and start breaking rules. Eventually they quit on their own or get banned.

It's actually a pretty healthy environment because people either learn to improve or they leave.

What happens when some of the good members snap before the one they don't like?

 

[Tucker933]

What happens when some of the good members snap before the one they don't like?

Hasn't happened in our almost 8 years. That's why they're good members!

 

[/foogle]

All of this sounds familiar :X

 

[MeganChan]

Even if the member is someone I don't care for or I know others don't, if I have to deal with anything with them I usually try to be very polite, and honestly treat them like I would every other member.

 

[Jason76]

I came across this on one forum - and the problem was that the members made most of the posts, and in fact, banning the members would destroy the site. Well, rules were made - but they were a joke, un-enforceable.

 

[Katrina]

I came across this on one forum - and the problem was that the members made most of the posts, and in fact, banning the members would destroy the site. Well, rules were made - but they were a joke, un-enforceable.

What did the rules say?

 

[Thomasss]

This is why the block (or "ignore") button on most forum softwares exists. Usually, I've always had a rule saying that you must respect other community members and not antagonize or purposely create drama for the sole purpose of "annoying" other members; in most cases of moderating I strongly encourage the users ignoring each other on the software and if that does not work, then we enforce policy as needed.