Unfairly banned

by LOTP on Feb 25, 2009 2:02 PM PST

I was recently banned from participating on BlogaBull, I think I got booted because disagreed with others on the value of Ben Gordon, I was not beligerant with people. I respected others' opinions. I do not think I should be banned because I don't have the same love for Ben Gordon as others in that forum. All we are doing is voicing our opinions, and for a person to be silenced for his or her opinion is unfair. I want to know how would you all handle this situation, and what are your feelings about this?

Tweet Comment 9 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I feel your pain

Go forth and prosper.

by Jerome Armstrong on Mar 3, 2009 4:35 PM PST reply actions

LOTP

I’ve been unfairly banned as well; however, I don’t think SB Nation gives a rat’s ass. They give their blog editors autonomy to do whatever they want which is good, but that means they can ban whoever they want for whatever reason, and that really sucks. You don’t like that guy’s syntax? Banned… You don’t like that other dude’s profile image? Gone… It’s just too arbitrary.

I’ve come up with some guidelines for blog editors on being fair to their posters. I originally wrote it for that azz that banned me, but I think it applies to all SB Nation editors.

Guidelines for Being Fair to Your Posters
(for future reference. Since you’ve already banned me, maybe you won’t screw with the next guy.)

1. Have solid rules.
You need to spell out clearly what’s allowed and what’s over the line. You don’t have to write a book, just 4-5 rules for appropriateness, foul language, hate speech, etc. It will make things a lot easier for you down the road. When a poster gets out of line, he won’t be able to accuse you of making rules up as you go.

2. Everyone follows the rules.
The rules must apply to everyone, even you and your co-authors or what’s the point?

3. Be direct and concise.
If someone breaks the rules, no need for long explanations or half apologies. Be straight forward. Tell him what he did wrong and how he will be punished for it. Don’t argue with him and don’t entertain long conversations. Leading him on only gives him false hope that you actually give a shit. If he’s been especially egregious, just cut him off without an explanation. He’ll be pissed, but he’ll get over it.

4. Troublemaking friends?
Does he contribute positively to your blog? Has he been a member of your blog for a while? If so, you might consider giving him the benefit of the doubt. If not, see 3 above.

     A) Discuss it with him.

     1. Exchange e-mails. Make a good faith effort. Be open and honest. Be prepared for a lengthy discussion for some hard headed posters.

     2. Don’t leave him hanging. If he’s e-mailed you and he doesn’t get a prompt response, he might second guess your motives or make untrue assumptions about you and others.

Sometimes, just an "I’m real busy- I’ll get back with you when I have more time" or "Let me think about it and get back with you" works well. You’re at least acknowledging that you read his last e-mail and that there’s a reason for a delay. If he feels you’re making a good faith effort, he’ll be willing to wait a long while.

3. E-mail conversations are private. Your blog rules can’t be enforced on private e-mails exchanged between you and him. That’s simply not fair.

If you’re unprepared or unwilling to put in the time and effort, see 3 above but remember, try to make this determination before you start otherwise any half-hearted effort on your part will only seem vindictive.

B) Use your co-authors.

     1. If you’re too busy, you have co-authors; use them. Ask for volunteers.

     2. Personalities are different. What might be hard for you to explain might be easy for one of your co-authors. There might be a co-author that really understands your ‘rule breaker’ and can clear up any misunderstanding quickly and easily.

When dealing with unruly posters that you’ve given the ‘benefit of the doubt’, it’s best to discuss a course of action with all your co-authors, if possible. What one co-author sees as a violation of the rules, another may find perfectly acceptable. You, of course, should have the final say, but using the input from all your co-authors "smoothes" the rules and makes them less arbitrary.

(I think it could use some refinement and/or editing. Feel free.)

A place to for SB Nation staff and dev team to engage with community members as the network grows. We need your feedback!

Is that the truth or just spoon fed bull shit? I guess we’ll find out.

Wes Welker can't be stopped.

by 10forTech on Mar 3, 2009 9:21 PM PST reply actions

Those aren't bad.

3. E-mail conversations are private. Your blog rules can’t be enforced on private e-mails exchanged between you and him. That’s simply not fair.

If you’re complaining about that then odds are that you probably crossed the line in your e-mail.

There are some good ideas and most (if not all) of the sites have community guidelines outlined somewhere. Keep in mind that these sites are run by the bloggers for fun. If they decide that you are detracting from their enjoyment of running the site then they are well within their rights to ban you. It’s no different from getting booted from a bar.

Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.

by PPP on Mar 6, 2009 10:46 AM PST up reply actions

Thanks for the reply

I’ve been kicked out of a few bars in my life. I remember giving the bouncer a good reason to remove me.

…most (if not all) of the sites have community guidelines outlined somewhere.

You’d think so. Unfortunately the rules for joining most of the SB Nation blog sites are a few sentences or less. Sometimes it’s only a few words.

If you’re complaining about that then odds are that you probably crossed the line in your e-mail.

Crossed what line? If there was a line I didn’t know about it. That’s the whole point of my post.

Wes Welker can't be stopped.

by 10forTech on Mar 8, 2009 7:46 PM PDT up reply actions

Yeah

Some of the sites haven’t outlined them completely. That’s something that the sites without them are in the process of putting together to make sure that everyone knows the rules.

Crossed what line? If there was a line I didn’t know about it. That’s the whole point of my post.

You complained about enforcing blog rules on your e-mail correspondence so my guess would be that if you put yourself in the blogger’s shoes that you might see why he did so.

Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.

by PPP on Mar 11, 2009 6:30 AM PDT up reply actions

My (formerly) favorite blog site has 1 rule (if you can call it a rule):

Be nice.

Yes, that’s right……… “be nice”. Now, please, can you tell me where ‘the line’ is?

I’ve put myself in the blogger’s shoes and found no reason to ban me. Like I’ve said, I was unfairly banned.

Wes Welker can't be stopped.

by 10forTech on Mar 15, 2009 7:29 PM PDT up reply actions

Thanks for the comment

Based largely on this exchange, we are currently going through our blogs and have our bloggers outlining what their community guidelines are so people can see it clearly. They’re including more detailed guidelines for when people first sign up as well as putting a much more prominent link to the community guidelines up in the menu. You are right in that if we expect people to police their own community, the rules by which they govern should be prominent.

by Tyler Bleszinski on Mar 19, 2009 8:04 AM PDT up reply actions