A Community Statement

[The Saucepan Man]

Lalwendë, there were repeated requests, here and elsewhere, for a full explanation of why davem was banned, yet when they are given you say that we (presumably those providing those explanations) are digging ourselves a deeper hole. Either you accept the explanations as being honestly given and that the decision was made in good faith, whether you agree with it or not, or you don’t. If you don’t, then the only real alternative is that the mods/admins involved acted in bad faith and/or with ulterior motives, and that those who have provided the explanations are either actively lying or, at the very least, being economical with the truth. That is not the case but, if you believe it, then there is likely to be nothing that I, or anyone, can say to convince you otherwise.

As to whether davem’s ban was justified, I have, again, provided just about as full an explanation now as I feel that I can give. To reiterate it, in its essence, the fact is that the entire mod/admin team involved thought davem’s posts to be inappropriate and, in many cases, offensive and members were in fact offended by them. That is more than sufficient justification, in my view, for the warnings that were given and the temporary ban. The fact that davem continued to post in the same manner, after those repeated warnings and that temporary ban, in my view fully justified the full ban issued by The Barrow-Wight.

Just to be clear, though, there was no favouring one “side” or silencing another. Davem had ample opportunity to make his views known on that thread and did so at length. His position was, I am sure, fully understood by all contributing to it some time before any serious problem arose. As I have said, I agreed with him in essence. Additionally, in answer to Boromir88, I would reiterate a point made in my earler post:

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

I always tried to avoid being overly officious or heavy-handed as a moderator. However, the Downs is a community. One with a few perfectly straightforward (and, in my view, perfectly reasonable) rules. In any society, one should not simply ignore the rules which govern it, persist in challenging them and “agree to disagree” with those charged with enforcing them.

If anyone remains concerned over this issue, go back and read the LotB thread in its entirety and then read all of davem’s posts after he withdrew from the discussion. It’s not the whole story, because there were also PMs involved, but it’s pretty compelling in my view. If you read (or have read) all of that and still disagree, then again there is nothing that I, or anyone else, can say to change your mind.

As for this “tone” issue, no one (spammers and trolls apart) need worry about being banned without being warned and told exactly why a particular post, comment, manner etc is inappropriate. This happens very, very rarely. Rarer still is the case where someone ends up being banned because of repeated disruptive, abrasive and offensive behaviour. Including davem, it has happened only twice in the (nearly) four years that I have been here. That, in my view, is because people instinctively know when something that they have drafted or posted has over-stepped the mark. My experience of discussions on this forum, both serious and light-hearted, tells me very clearly that virtually everyone, if not everyone, who posts here regularly knows what is appropriate and what is not.

Warnings are not given and bans are not implemented because of some machismo urge to satisfy male ego. They are given and implemented because the mods/admins (both male and female) consider, after deliberation, that it is appropriate to do so.

What was the purpose of this thread? My understanding from the petition was that it was to seek further clarification for davem’s ban and reassurance that members will not be banned without warning and without being given a very clear indication as to why whatever it was that prompted the warning was considered inappropriate. I feel that I have said all that I can to address those concerns. There is not much more that I can usefully say.

Finally, for the record, I wish to make clear that I am English (very much so), I am a keen libertarian, I have no strong religious beliefs, I have (or at least like to think that I have) a good sense of humour, and I am a long standing Monty Python fan. None of those qualities alter my assessment of this matter.