The "troll" myth
Notwithstanding all those benighted calls for a more "conformist" kind of "debate" here, where any diverging opinion is stupidly labelled as trolling, I would like to know which rules Ben Frost has specifically infringed - because I've never seen him personally offend anyone, or post things off-topic, or spam threads with anything other than his own views on a given topic.
An explanation would be highly advised, since I am also one of those often issuing diverging opinions from the gullible mainstream, particularly on the FUGLY, I repeat, FUGLY AWatch.
On the other hand, I would easily understand suspensions/banning due to illegal actions, continued prejudiced remarks and the like.
But are we supposed to always have the same views, just like North Korea? Or is this becoming MacRumors now?
An explanation would be highly advised, since I am also one of those often issuing diverging opinions from the gullible mainstream, particularly on the FUGLY, I repeat, FUGLY AWatch.
On the other hand, I would easily understand suspensions/banning due to illegal actions, continued prejudiced remarks and the like.
But are we supposed to always have the same views, just like North Korea? Or is this becoming MacRumors now?
Comments
Whatever he wrote got deleted, so unless you were following the thread in that instance you won't know what it was that got him banned.
He kept expressing his displeasure about the Apple Watch in a almost obsessive manner. We all knew his opinion of it, but he insisted on letting us know time, and time again, and that drew the ire of many here.
This wasn't to do with having one opinion or another. It's about how you express your opinion and not disrupting discussion threads. The aim is civility, not conformity:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/184333/appleinsiders-updated-commenting-guidelines
How people reacted to Benjamin's posts didn't help matters, some people refuse to use their block list and instead throw insults in return and that made matters worse but he was escalating things himself.
The most important thing is to avoid insulting other members or making offensive remarks, these have nothing to do with the thread topics. Having an agenda to get someone banned is similarly disruptive. Behave how you'd normally be expected to in the real world where you have to exercise a degree of politeness in how you express yourself and also tolerance in how you react to other people expressing themselves.
Benjamin Frost had been making more and more offensive posts. His most recent posts crossed the line. Commenters' posts reflect on the quality of the site.
This wasn't to do with having one opinion or another. It's about how you express your opinion and not disrupting discussion threads. The aim is civility, not conformity:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/184333/appleinsiders-updated-commenting-guidelines
How people reacted to Benjamin's posts didn't help matters, some people refuse to use their block list and instead throw insults in return and that made matters worse but he was escalating things himself.
The most important thing is to avoid insulting other members or making offensive remarks, these have nothing to do with the thread topics. Having an agenda to get someone banned is similarly disruptive. Behave how you'd normally be expected to in the real world where you have to exercise a degree of politeness in how you express yourself and also tolerance in how you react to other people expressing themselves.
Thank you, Marvin - that was exactly my point; so I can only hope that AI admins do not fall prey to "peer pressure" in order to suspend or ban members just because their opinions are annoying to some or deemed as "trolling" by others. As you correctly stated, the block list feature is already there for all to use it.
In any case, it would be great to have Ben around again (minus the offensive posts), at least so that we could see a counterpoint from time to time.
Br, it's the actions that matter, not the label.
It's one thing to make a point in a matter conducive to thoughtful discussion, and quite another to incite emotional reaction for its own end, over and over again, ad nauseum.
Look at BF's post count, relative to the lifespan of his/her account. I'm no mod, but the never-ending deluge of one-note content (as well as some content that was spectacularly uninformed) was a little amusing at first, but eventually came across as a deliberate effort to drown out and derail civil discourse.
Look, I'm not perfect, either, I've had my share of posts removed (as have you, today, in fact). But I also have learned from it, and tried to avoid putting myself in that position again (and never been banned).
The way I look at it, the experience here is supposed to be both enriching and edifying. One can endure only so many pies in the face.
Br, it's the actions that matter, not the label.
It's one thing to make a point in a matter conducive to thoughtful discussion, and quite another to incite emotional reaction for its own end, over and over again, ad nauseum.
Look at BF's post count, relative to the lifespan of his/her account. I'm no mod, but the never-ending deluge of one-note content (as well as some content that was spectacularly uninformed) was a little amusing at first, but eventually came across as a deliberate effort to drown out and derail civil discourse.
Look, I'm not perfect, either, I've had my share of posts removed (as have you, today, in fact). But I also have learned from it, and tried to avoid putting myself in that position again (and never been banned).
The way I look at it, the experience here is supposed to be both enriching and edifying. One can endure only so many pies in the face.
Good points. But perhaps people should stop worrying so much and taking things so seriously when discussing in an online forum.
See for example "Slurpy"'s rabid reactions against any of my posts...he seems like having a lot of chips on his shoulder, even when I write totally harmless messages; not to mention his misquoting of my posts, stating things that I've never said on AI...better yet, why not take some passion fruit juice? I heard it's excellent for calming the spirits.
BF's posts may have been annoying to some, but they also provided a much-needed counterpoint to mainstream apologists here. BTW, when is he coming back?
I think his ban is permanent.
I think his ban is permanent.
BTW, this may be a terminology issue - but on MacRumors, "bans" were permanent by definition, whereas "suspensions" were time-limited. Why doesn't AI use a similar approach? Otherwise it can get confusing when you see someone labeled as "banned", just to show up again some time later.
If I'm not mistaken there are 3, 7, and 10 day bans on AI including a permanent one. There's a warning system but I haven't seen it used ever. Members should also be notified if something they wrote has led to an infraction. I don't know what it was BF wrote, but it seems to have gotten him banned permanently. I do agree with you, the terminology should be changed, temp bans should read 'user suspended' instead of 'banned user'.