Annoying member - how do you handle?

Works for me!

The work of poking with a stick would be exhausting !!! :speachless: :p

 

Well if you use the white page for this user, they won't even be able to access the forum. Or you can direct them to a page stating that the site is under maintenance. Or something silly like it has been hacked. .

 

Believe it or not, the news that "Blab is down" or "hacked" would be all over the hobby in 30 minutes. By email, phone and posting in other forums. The grapevine is astonishing.

And the hacked users would get in touch with someone and compare notes, even ask to log in under another account to figure out why one had access and the other didn't. Then their friends would post about the issue on the forum and ask if others are having the same experience and what management is doing to fix it ... handling that would obviously be a whole other thing. If the posts were removed they would be posted on another forum with wild speculation about "what is going on???"

Many hobby members frequently get together with their local group on weekends. The forum's performance would be one of the things remarked and discussed at these gatherings as well as on other forums. The entertainment du-jour.

I think on forums where few members know each other personally, and where there isn't such an off-forum communications network, the hack would be very effective.


I have to share this anecdote about what I'm dealing with ... 2 years ago one of the weekend gatherings was widely promoted, and vip's were flown in from all over the country as part of big activities. The day after the event it was all over the hobby that it was over-subscribed and disorganized, and ran 3 1/2 hours longer than it was supposed to. Dozens of little mishaps were repeated ad naseum (e.g. the vips didn't get their lunch on time.) People still discuss it. That's what I'm up against. :ohi:

 

Update from the battlefield ...

One long-time on-and-off annoying member suffered an especially virulent outbreak and is now kicked out. Far as I'm concerned probably not coming back. Posted a screamingly funny gif with bad words in it in the general forum - sent an "I don't give a ----" image in response to a note from a mod about it - meantime posted in the forum that she disagrees with the rules (like no bad words in the general forum) and is testing the limits "to the edge." So she should be pretty happy to have found the edge after working so hard to locate it.

I rather think the other members are fully expecting (and hoping) to see a strong management action, based on their tastefully worded responses to her.

This one has in the past occasionally excused her own behavior by explaining she was either on or off her meds - I can never remember which. Best I can tell she seems to loose her grip each time the meds either come or go. Anyway - my message in the past to publicly-declared medicated members is that if you sense this is not a good time to be able to follow forum rules - best stay off the forum, till things settle down for ya. I can't ask all the other members to suffer through all the medication changes, that's not really a rules waiver. :unhunh:

 

The immaturity relayed by some members can be amusing as hell - kicking and screaming because of an issue that they created in the first place.

 

I ditched miserable users for this very reason. I take a great pride in my site's performance and didn't want anyone going around saying it was slow and unresponsive etc.

 

Drama queen = quick ticket to the banned group.

 

That is the answer to everything.

 

:lol: Pretty funny!

 

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Thank you so much Oyobiia, my mods will love this! :p

Modification: Dunno if we need the "lift ban after _" box.

I'll let the mods think of some dropdown selections for "Reason to Show User." Starting with You Are A Pill.

 

Hah, that is funny. :unhunh:

 

Oyobiia, that's good.

Now you just need a ban log.

 

I have one member who provokes this response in several other members; the catch is, he genuinely wants to be part of the community and make friends, he just can't help expressing his religious opinions. It's gotten to the point where he deletes half his messages and reposts them without a comment or two. He really is trying, and I hope the other members recognize that.

 

Fun thread! adminaddict is a great site! :thumbup:

• Miserable users will soon sound like the forum is not working well as they talk via other means.
• Tachy goes Coventry will present a problem if they are ever taken out of that because several posts suddenly show up.
• Infractions with or without time off will reward the troll with attention and give them something to talk about when they get a chance.
• Ban, and they will sign up with a different screen name.

The vast majority of users should not be controlled by a minority of marginal people.


'Moderated' user group with small PM box works, only approve the better posts, and soft delete the rest. Incredibly frustrating for them

If they start to behave take them out, if they don't leave them in. Eventually they seem to invite their 'friends' to go to another site.

 

That's evil, yet I think I may give it a try at some point. :devil:

 

Amen to that.

If you aren't the one trying to work with them. :lol: Actually it was a little too much fun for some mods who preferred making witty comments and throwing peanut shells to actually moderating. Split the mod group into 'general' and 'intervention' to protect privacy all around.

 

Recently the mods reviewed policy on handling recidivists ...

Background: My forum has always tried to keep varied opinions and means of self-expressions on board, within the usual limits of no racism etc. We tolerate people who would not last a minute on most boards. We keep posts in violation on view with an added highlighted mod correction but rarely delete the content, except for language or bigotry. Believe it or not that is the best self-moderating encouragement ever. Most people are embarrassed in hindsight about what they posted, and knowing it will not be cleaned up for them has more people thinking before posting.

In the last few weeks the mod team has been re-considering our usual lengthy efforts to keep difficult members on board and inside the rules. This is only a handful of people, usually no more than 0-3 at any given time.

We've been inspired by a couple of profoundly reformed members who are active contributing members. A few others are hot and cold - they can stay gold for a time, but are more easily provoked into bad judgment than most members. Then there are a few hard-cases who seem to think the rules should be whatever they want them to be. These people seem to inevitably think that others should be severely reprimanded, while they themselves are justified in all their actions.

The mod team is game to work with people who become good members, but has had enough of those who break one promise after another, even with several months of reasonable behavior in between. It is not their opinions and statements, they are free to make those and others are expected to handle it in stride. These are the people who personalize discussions, turn exchanges of opinions into exchanges of insults, and provoke others into bickering that has nothing to do with the topic. If they made bigoted statements or more overt bashing they would be long gone, but they are sly about their approach to stirring up a fight rather than a hot topic.

So ...

If someone genuinely didn't understand what wasn't allowed, we continue to work with them as we always have. If it's the first time they were provoked into posting unwisely and were regretful afterwards, especially with an apology (most grown-ups are up to that,) the goal is to not have a repeat and go on from here.

We are not going to be quick to exclude someone who shows they do respect the rules and sincerely try to follow them, if very rarely they hit submit a bit quickly. If they are not provoking others and rarely stumble then they are not in the status of Problem Child.


But ...

We are distinguishing the difference between opinions and controversy, both of which are welcome, and bickering and personal remarks, which have technically never been allowed.

We are identifying members who respond to mod notes resentfully, especially when they are disagreeing with the rules and justifying actions they know are in violation.

When this is the case, we are no longer spending time on what has proven repeatedly to be a lost cause. The new policy is one warning, and if there is a second incident within a year, a week's suspension. The third time is out. Indefinitely.

The primary reason is the impact these trolls have had on other members, and how they have used our generosity in working with them to find more opportunities to troll. They are not trying to do better. Nor do they inspire discussion of an new opinion - just bickering because they pick at others rather than state their own case. Some other members, even those with thick hides, avoid threads where they are posting. Others who are easily provoked end up in trouble themselves. We are seeing a very very few members who are sly trolls and just have no upside for the forum.

Hopefully we are 2-3 years smarter than where we started, depending on the length of service of the mod.

 

And in light of the conclusions of the mods described above ...

We almost never ban people, the last one was probably 2 years ago. Then we get 3 in one week, counting the one posted about earlier.

Next chapter of 'tales from the front lines ... '

Must be the rising spring UV rays or something? First the one real card-carrying troll we have on board at present (had) - the one whose opinions I can't make out because all she ever does is shred the opinions of others - just killed a very good discussion of a broad range of views on the Supreme Court nominee. Then two of the more easily-provoked members went down in flames answering back personally. Two (2) posted mod warnings to stop the personal remarks, in rapid succession to show the mod meant it, were just ignored completely. The mod closed the thread, but by that point all the people who were really having a conversation were no longer posting anyway.

This has happened to several good current events discussion recently, due to the same players, particularly the troll.

Two people were clapped in the brig forthwith and another is basically on probation - one more idiocy and she too is in irons.

The thread was then re-opened. I called attention to it, and am happy to say that if anything the discussion was even more interesting, because people began contributing that had avoided it due to the troll.

The troll I have banned for good. She has been bad news on the forum from the day she joined about a year ago. Mod warnings have chased her off from time to time, but she returns and picks up where she left off. She has wanted to re-write the rulebook to permit her trolling while insisting other members merited infractions. When she senses we're ready to kick her out she will retire the field - temporarily. I observed and have been told that when she posts in any thread a number of our more thoughtful members just change the channel. I don't need a justification, for the good of the forum she can't return. But it is more than justified on the number of mod contacts.

The other suspension is coming back after a week, and honestly I regretted that decision before she even re-joined. Her reprieve is becasue she really doesn't initiate s*, but is easily sucked in, very poor judgment in her responses. Last Nov she retained her access with an agreement never to be provoked again. Since she did behave for 6 months and is a long-time member we decided on one, last, absolutely last, break for her.

As I asked for her agreement (again!!) to not retaliate but report the post and leave it to the mods in order to return ... she gave it, then added a para that her principals didn't allow her to sit by and be insulted. Then ensued a pointless exchange of emails where I said I couldn't accept a conditional agreement and ... yada yada ... she weaseled around in her replies ... finally I said I could not continue to explain something that every other member understood, perhaps this wasn't the right forum for her ... suddenly she DID understand and agreed. What's really behind that is that she does business buying and selling hobby goods through the forum, as do many of the hobbyists. That's what she cares about preserving. She doesn't give a d* about the forum or the members - or the mods.

I'm chapped that someone so manipulative that they try to agree while including some caveats that cancel their agreement, that they can point to later - but suddenly find they do understand when it's an either-or proposition - is back on the forum. Who will spit on anyone doing them a favor. After we did the exact same thing with/for her 6 months ago. Some of us who don't live this way are a bit slow to see the depth of it in others.

I normally don't bring people back if I think they will just end up being banned. No point, especially in stressing the mods one more time. I have no doubt this lady will prove my point.


I will be posting an announcement to the members about the change in policy for handling rules violations. While making the point that the rules have not changed. And no one not crossing them now needs worry, as they never needed them in the first place. I think the members will be appreciative, in spite of their respect for different viewpoints.

We are not limiting viewpoints, we are making room for more expression of them by getting rid of the trolls who are stifling, rather than contributing to, those viewpoints.

That's the deal.

 

Wow, 3Phase - fantastic posts. Thank you!

 

If you didn't read the whole saga to this new post ... the forum has had a few people who were chronically on the edge of the rules. They annoy the heck out of the other members, to the point the other members stop posting and even stop visiting.

Thought I would update how all this has worked out since the management consciousness-raising this past June.

I made the following points to the forum, and thankfully have a very few mods who are totally on board and willing to drop Ye Olde Mod Hammer on the un-teachables -

- The rules have not changed. No one not crossing them now needs worry, as they never needed the rules in the first place.
- Those who refuse to follow rules, reaping 3 infractions, are banned. No arguing or discussing.
- If a member can't respect the rules and/or the mods, this is not the forum for them. The rules have worked well for a long time and are not up for debate.

We are not limiting viewpoints, we are making room for more expression of them by getting rid of the trolls who are stifling, rather than contributing to, those viewpoints.

I posted above that we had very few bans on record, because we thought we could reason with the bad actors, because of course as reasonable adults they would come to their senses. We learned that, for the very few, if a member was arguing and not respectful of rules and management, they were bringing big personal issues that we weren't going to fix through a few pm's. They were not changing their roll. Holding the line with them has resulted in 3 bans since June. In hindsight they were long overdue.

As a result ... the forum is livelier than ever. Controversial threads survive and carry on because the hundreds of remaining members don't get personal with others, regardless of the topic. That is at least partly due to mods who have trained the members and remind them - don't get personal, don't bicker, state your opinion and accept that others won't necessarily agree no matter how obviously blockheaded you think their opinions are. Traffic has increased from a couple of promotions and they have stayed rather than leaving in disgust - it's all up about 25% in the last few months. There is more posting by people who used to be lurkers.

There are still a couple of prolific posters who continue to need warnings that they are up to the line. Although they can be interesting, it remains to be seen if they will survive long-term.

The bottom line is that with 450-500 members visiting the forum daily, losing 2-3 buttheads doesn't mean squat, even if they post 30 time a day. Their absence is not mourned, regardless of their self-perceived belovedness. At least as many posts, if not more, come forth after they are gone from people who held back if the bad actors were in the thread.

So that's how that went.



Silly anecdote from the front lines ...
One of the recently banned members, who has been bickering with the mods about whether the rules apply to her or if she has total justification to ignore them, has been trying to trash talk the forum in other venues. She persuaded one of the ditzier members to post the banned member's 'voice,' something the banned member wrote, with great outraged fanfare about oppression (her word.) We caught it almost right away and Miss Ditz was suspended and sent stern notes.

Miss Ditz folded like a deck of cards. She didn't want to champion the banned member nearly as much as she wanted to post her family troubles on the forum. Since she has never been a mod issue, she got back on after a week's suspension and a groveling apology and promise to never, ever ever do it again. Her excuse was that we hadn't written a rule against it. We called bs - it's intuitive, silly cow, a banned person is banned.

The banned member inspired a few other members to post a 'challenge' to one of the rules, to which we responded with a short and crystal explanation of the logic. Other members posted in total support. (Not posting a member's personal information without their knowledge and permission... they challenged that rule. Smart. )

I think the misinformation campaign is petering out. The very few members who are hearing from the banned member now understand that they can't be silly about it and stay on the forum. The consistent moderating has made it clear what will be tolerated and what won't, and no one is exempt from the consequences. We are not having to spend more mod time on it.