Thread: Banning Policy at Teakdoor. What do you think?

Originally Posted by hillbilly

I think that before bannings are applied, we at TeakDoor. com need to understand the direction in which the forum is trying to head.

To my mind I reckon that the forum should be heading the way it is in terms of information about things that the users enjoy discussing like gardening and issues regarding domestic life in Thailand including stuff like building and putting in a swimming pool.

Personally, i like the construction, gardening, lifestyle & fun direction.

Me too.

f anyone constantly tries to misdirect us from this goal, then yea, kick da shit out of them...

That is creole yes then Hilly? :P

Yea it dis...

:up: :P

I dont think there should be any bannings per se but maybe suspending someone is worthy of thought but what are the parameters.

I mean, what would constitute a 1 week suspension as opposed to a 3 day suspension?

Originally Posted by kenkannif

Actually I though on Ajarn rather than suspended me if they'd just deleted my posts, after a while I'd have given up.....well I think I would have

The only problem is that we'd need a full time mod to keep up with all the crap that shitforbrains posts.

Hey Dennis, the cap said 'solacious' WTF does that mean?

Dennis the dictionary replied:

You can consider solacious Pooly as showing a bit of pussy. In fact open pussy to be closer to the truth. A little bit of fluff will get by the scrutineers but too much gash will result in a scratching of the piccy and a not too nice pm from DD's mum.

Cheers Den!
It's tuff being thick.

spent time on another forum where they had a kind of 'purgatory section' - this was where you got sent if the mods felt you were stepping over the line too much.
You could only post in this section (a bit like the Trolls one here) with all the other baddies - I think you had to make a certain number of sensible posts there before you were allowed 'back out' .

Seemed like a good idea to me - you had to talk your way out of trouble - although for some reason they just banned me outright - and blocked my ISP no. - fucking liberal tossers - that's what they were.
- Good idea in principle though if properly implemented.

I also think dodgy posts (within reason) should not be deleted if a person is banned (like on barladies.com) - just show somehow that the user is banned - they probably had their good moments on the way to madness.

I don't think anybody should be banned, unless they become obessively over the top. What I dislike most is when moderators 'take action' against people because of their personal grievences.. :?

Originally Posted by Wally Dorian Raffles

I don't think anybody should be banned, unless they become obessively over the top. What I dislike most is when moderators 'take action' against people because of their personal grievences.. :?

I couldnt agree more Wally and I think that this is what this poll is about.
It is a question of confidence that the powers that be, when challenged, will react accordingly. Few posters will ever come to be judged in such a way but when they do will admin or the mods act in a way that will be respected and expected by the posters?

I certainly hope so but the admin and mods need the posters mandate.

Fok me, I sound like a republican. :P


btw, what is a republican?

If there's any banning to be done it should be the same rules for everyone.

take ajarn for instance - some of the stuff the 'old timers' there write would be an instant ban for someone with a low post count.

I've been banned there for things in the past that still have me scratching my head about. I'm sure that's why it's a haven for trolls.

Looking over your records, didn't 'Fitz' get banned?

I'd say your policy is already in place!

Just ban everybody and then radnomly change the mods passwords so nobody can get in and do anything or post anything or sign up again.

Problem sorted.

Originally Posted by Donleavy

Looking over your records, didn't 'Fitz' get banned?

I'd say your policy is already in place!

Where are these records?

Nah, fitz never got banned. He tried and tried but in the end just gave up trying.

Originally Posted by colourful-era

If there's any banning to be done it should be the same rules for everyone.

take ajarn for instance - some of the stuff the 'old timers' there write would be an instant ban for someone with a low post count.

I've been banned there for things in the past that still have me scratching my head about. I'm sure that's why it's a haven for trolls.

Good point, but seeing as it works in my favour most of the time, I'm going to say that this is a good thing. 8)

^ Of course it is

Originally Posted by Wally Dorian Raffles

I don't think anybody should be banned, unless they become obessively over the top. What I dislike most is when moderators 'take action' against people because of their personal grievences.. :?

Spot on there Wally. A fair playing field is what is expected by posters.

So I take it the decision between banning Macha or having him silenced is going the way of a 10,000 baht MotoCy hit then?

Put me down for 2-3K mate (push comes to shove I'll pay it all ).

I'll happily chip in!

I only have one suggestion:

** Ban those who have more than one posting nickname...other than that, "let's get it on"

Good to see you agree as well So how much you good for?

The only other one I have is Saggin Cuzizzle....DERFLARELDA got banned by DH2K now tell me which one of you sandbaggers is RC ?

Saggin = Niggas :P :P I made that one for kerux !

Niggas Cuzizzle

Who is RC?

Raycarey...or is it really Macha fuggin with me ?

I'd put money on the latter mate...some people have weird ideas as to what is 'funny'

RC = macha

As I said