Dissidents

[OGPhilly]

Some times requests for mods to address issues goes without response for hours or even days. You're going to basically kill any prospect of live discussion by taking active members and requiring them to have their posts approved unless you add like 6 more mods and make sure there's always one online.

[The Comrade]

punishment is often punishing, yes.

[The Dharma Bum]

Fairly novel solution. Who thought of it?

[OGPhilly]

[The Comrade]

if someone is breaking the rules frequently why does their activity matter? it just means they're posting more nonsense and not much is lost from their being punished.

[OGPhilly]

Suspension/penalty box makes sense as a punishment. Keeping people around but ensuring that whatever they say will be posted at a severe delay just f**k up the slow of conversation for everyone.

[JDHURF]

I think it's a far better alternative to a ban Philly.

[OGPhilly]

Well we definitely shouldn't be banning anyone.

[JDHURF]

Obviously this is a response to saz. Easily 3/4 of his posts could be erased and nothing lost. It would help if there were at least one mod online most of the time so that posts aren't waiting hours and days to be approved, but pretending saz's posts contribute meaningfully to any flow of conversation is the lulz

I've never reported him and I don't want to see him gone, but I can't pretend that I have a problem with his posts needing approval from a mod for a while.

[uebermann]

The group wasn't just created for one person, but as mentioned earlier, we're going to look and try to use it in place of a long suspension (or possibly a ban). We realize there may be a long delay in when a post is made and when it shows up, however it probably won't take as long as some of the reports do, on the whole.

Also, I'd rather people not comment about other posters in here as eventually it'll delve into who thinks who should go into the group. So lets try to keep that out of the discussion here, please.