Amnesty?

[mofgimmers]

Okay, this is a passing thought that I haven't thought through at all. I'm full of a cold and my brain isn't functioning on full power...

...but I thought that it might be kinda cool to lift the bans on some previous members of TW (I say some because, say, 'Louise', should never be allowed back). The main reason I think it should be considered is because we should be above holding grudges forever. If a point needed to be made, it's been made by now. Naturally, that's assuming any of our previously banned would want to come back!

Discuss... I guess.

[FD]

I agree, but I can't see it happening.

Permanent bans are only good for persistent trolls, hateful people...

[seanworth]

I think they have temporary bans in place already. A permanent ban is only done when temporary bans don't work. Not sure how an amnesty will work other than being the final temporary ban plus one.

[Worthy4England]

My only comment is that surely this is mainly a moderator decision. They have to pick up the bits when some of our guys cause a problem not the general populace (such as myself).

From explanations I've seen posted on here about "the banning process" and why it was applied, the mods seem to have operated within the guidelines set for the site. So that's warnings, more warnings, extra warnings, temporary bans, revocation of temporary bans, warnings, more warnings etc. Bored with it, permanent ban.

I'm struggling to think of anyone (who's been a regular contributor) that has been given a permanent ban for no particular reason after a "one-off" type incident. It's been a steady build up of crap over an extended period of time. There's also the point that if you lift permanent bans, then surely the message is that posters can indeed do what they want, because sooner or later, the admin will crack and let you back.

I don't think it's a "grudge" issue. If someone has been told time and again that it would be preferable if they didn't do X or Y and they continue to do so, then it's nothing to do with "grudge". If I keep shoplifting and eventually get sent down for it, it's not a grudge, it's because I've ignored all the times I've been let off with a fine or community service. Most of the posters on here seem to be able to have differences of opinion, generally without upsetting the status quo, some people seem to repeatedly push it too far for the mods.

[mofgimmers]

I suppose 'grudge' was the wrong word. Like I said, my brain is fuddled by illness. I just wanted to start a debate to see what people thought about it. There's a bit of me that would like to see us say 'come on back! Let's not fight anymore!' to banned members, but by the same token, there's a bit of me that worries that I might be being a little woolly and the site would soon descend into farce on their return.

[lovethesmellofnapalm]

My only comment is that surely this is mainly a moderator decision. They have to pick up the bits when some of our guys cause a problem not the general populace (such as myself).

From explanations I've seen posted on here about "the banning process" and why it was applied, the mods seem to have operated within the guidelines set for the site. So that's warnings, more warnings, extra warnings, temporary bans, revocation of temporary bans, warnings, more warnings etc. Bored with it, permanent ban.

I'm struggling to think of anyone (who's been a regular contributor) that has been given a permanent ban for no particular reason after a "one-off" type incident. It's been a steady build up of crap over an extended period of time. There's also the point that if you lift permanent bans, then surely the message is that posters can indeed do what they want, because sooner or later, the admin will crack and let you back.

I don't think it's a "grudge" issue. If someone has been told time and again that it would be preferable if they didn't do X or Y and they continue to do so, then it's nothing to do with "grudge". If I keep shoplifting and eventually get sent down for it, it's not a grudge, it's because I've ignored all the times I've been let off with a fine or community service. Most of the posters on here seem to be able to have differences of opinion, generally without upsetting the status quo, some people seem to repeatedly push it too far for the mods.

Are we in danger of taking ourselves a tad too seriously here? Its an internet forum ateotd. There are (were) regular contributors who (were) are clearly argumentative for the sake of it.I for one quite enjoy the ridiculousness of it all and Fair do's- better here i'd say than in the boozer where a smack in the teeth would probably result. If you dont want to engage in the debate dont follow the link- dont engage. Clearly however some things cant be said- racist,homophobic, Thatcherite stuff for instance. The site has become a little duller in terms of belly laughs recently. Although still better than t'other one.

[FD]

Permanent bans should be for the pricks who came on after the Wigan game.

People like Batman and Commie are/were a part of the "community".

Internet = Serious business.

[Bruce Rioja]

Are we in danger of taking ourselves a tad too seriously here?

That's two things that we agree on now. Hey, do you want to be mates?

Seriously though, it's just an internet forum when all's said and done.

Like I found myself saying to people earlier in the week: It's just a bit of snow. Get over it.

[Soldier_Of_The_White_Army]

You have to understand that we don't just troll through threads, then say 'he's being a prxck, heeeeeeeeee's arrdahere!' A great deal of it comes from constant complaints from different members. If it's one member constantly complaining about another, we check relevant posts for internet bullying (it happens!)

If it's few different members, complaining about one members, then there's obviously a problem. Other then that, we only really act when a member doesn't abide by the site rules, or is clearly a WUM.

If we were to allow perminantly banned members back on site, some people would be happy, probably more would be pxssed off.

And what if their spots hadn't changed? What if they continue to ignore warnings from the MOD's and Admin? What then? Do we send them a message saying 'Right! This time, you really are perminantly banned! For at least six weeks!!'

That said, we're not nazi's as some would have you think. If you was to see just how much discussion and debate that goes on in the secret lad below the forums, just for ONE member before action is taken. You'd realise why our posts counts are so very high. We are more then happy to listen to your views, and if the majority state they want certain rules and regulations on T-W changed, we're all ears.

[mofgimmers]

As far as I'm concerned, it's all just food for thought. I know how hard being a mod is. All you wanna do is come on the boards and have a laugh, then you spend 2 hours tidying up after everyone. It's crap. However, in a flash of niceness (they don't come along often so I thought I'd act on it), I thought 'wouldn't an amnesty be good?'

[bobo the clown]

Clearly however some things cant be said - racist, homophobic,Thatcherite stuff for instance.

... b-hell, Napalm.

I must have missed the day that being centre right was made illegal. It can't be long before the con of the past 10 years is seen for what it is, but I'd never suggest adding being Blairite to a list of things which warrant being banned from a football web-site.

[Bruce Rioja]

Clearly however some things cant be said - racist, homophobic,Thatcherite stuff for instance.

... b-hell, Napalm.

I must have missed the day that being centre right was made illegal. It can't be long before the con of the past 10 years is seen for what it is, but I'd never suggest adding being Blairite to a list of things which warrant being banned from a football web-site.

I think that he'd just missed 'anti-' off of the front of it, Bobo.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Clearly however some things cant be said - racist, homophobic,Thatcherite stuff for instance.

... b-hell, Napalm.

I must have missed the day that being centre right was made illegal. It can't be long before the con of the past 10 years is seen for what it is, but I'd never suggest adding being Blairite to a list of things which warrant being banned from a football web-site.

He was joking, right?!

[lovethesmellofnapalm]

Clearly however some things cant be said - racist, homophobic,Thatcherite stuff for instance.

... b-hell, Napalm.

I must have missed the day that being centre right was made illegal. It can't be long before the con of the past 10 years is seen for what it is, but I'd never suggest adding being Blairite to a list of things which warrant being banned from a football web-site.

He was joking, right?!

again

[Bruce Rioja]

Clearly however some things cant be said - racist, homophobic,Thatcherite stuff for instance.

... b-hell, Napalm.

I must have missed the day that being centre right was made illegal. It can't be long before the con of the past 10 years is seen for what it is, but I'd never suggest adding being Blairite to a list of things which warrant being banned from a football web-site.

He was joking, right?!

again

Tis you that's doing the fishing, Jockey.

[lovethesmellofnapalm]

Just cant believe it took so long to get a bite

[FaninOz]

I don't believe that we should let someone back in who has gone through the whole process and finished up banned. I'm sure the Mods go through the whole process thoroughly and when they finally come to tick the permanently banned box they do so for very very good reasons.

So lets not open up pandoras box again for these guys to escape from, a life sentance is a life sentance.

[Montreal Wanderer]

I have no objection to people being allowed back after a permanent ban (one can be paroled from life sentences), but this is entirely up to site admin as far as I am concerned. It is not a question of a vote amongst our members, any more than the original banning decision should be.

[Lord Kangana]

Clearly however some things cant be said - racist, homophobic,Thatcherite stuff for instance.

... b-hell, Napalm.

I must have missed the day that being centre right was made illegal. It can't be long before the con of the past 10 years is seen for what it is, but I'd never suggest adding being Blairite to a list of things which warrant being banned from a football web-site.

Tony Blair is Thatcher and Reagans secret love child. Thats why we're in a mess.

[jaffka]

If life does mean life on here, then I wish that the mods could become judges