@rightmeow said in Review of Recent Bans:
It is not good.
It is NOT kind
It is not warranted.
Alright. So what makes you say this? This is a serious question. Other than 'I like all the people that were banned and think they should not have been banned.'
You say it's not good. But the forum has been relatively peaceful since many of the loudest voices were removed, or moved on. We've seen many posters starting to come back since these decisions were made.
You say it's not kind. Well. Ok, maybe it's not. But were they kind in turn? Some of them flung some pretty harsh rhetoric at Ganymede. Many of them said some pretty unkind things about me. Does kindness only go one way? Should we not have expected it in return? Especially when one of the admins, over and over, asked people to stop because it was becoming emotionally damaging for one of the other admins? (Notably, not me.)
I'd say that the actions taken were perfectly warranted. Not only were they warranted, the persons to whom the actions were directed were given multiple warnings and told explicitly what would happen if they continued, and they pressed on anyway, behaving like serious jerks in a lot of cases.
Do you think that it was appropriate to allow the behavior to continue unchecked? Or that it's appropriate to allow people to continue breaking the rules unabated after an admin patiently asks multiple times for them to stop, and then gives them a final warning before actions are taken? Do you think that's a good way to run a forum, or shows a good example to other readers not currently engaging in that activity?
Because it seems to me that it was both good and warranted, and that whether or not it was kind isn't really totally relevant. But we're still discussing the situation. If you have feedback that you feel would be beneficial for us to consider, then by all means share.