Zapping questions

[naomi24]

Ed, when you zap an unwanted poster, is there any possibility of you actually looking at the question and the responses to that question before zapping the whole thread? There was an excellent question in R&S which produced some very intelligent and considered responses - but because the person who posted it is obviously no longer welcome on AB, the whole thing has disappeared. Tragic! What a complete waste of time - and brains!

[naomi24]

Ron and Boxy, yes I know that - but since we are lately constantly subjected to rule updates, it is quite clear that nothing is set in stone, rules can be changed, and this particular one is, in my opinion, ripe for reconsideration. There really is no point in people researching serious theological issues and writing long explanatory answers if all their work is to be in vain. They'll end up not bothering - and who could blame them?

[sir.prize]

I can understand the reason for banning someusers. Suspensions confuse me. The Ed posted this:
///Suspensions are for an ARBITARY amount of time. Editor's decide this.
10:27 Tue 21st Dec 2010///
ArbitRary definition is 'Determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle'. I do find that interesting.

[naomi24]

I'm actually not really bothered about what happens to the real troublemakers - but if the questions they leave behind them are good, then I can't see any reason why we can't eject the poster but retain the question.

[vivandorron]

naomi...I agree. So herewith I am calling upon the Editor to comment when tomorrow he is back in his office.

ED SAY SOMETHING PLEASE.

Ron

[AB Editor]

Morning, What thread was it Naomi? I'll see if I can dig it up for you.

As for why - we can suspend, and do so when a user has contributed a useful/interesting question. BUT, when a user has a majority of nasty questions we'll often have to ban them (to remove ALL those questions at once). Individually pruning isn't always the best use of our time, and as such, there is occasional collateral damage.

I do find it funny that when I suggest a few guidelines for debate everyone is suddenly "Stifled" - especially when I'm still asking for your opinions about it! (Over here if you want to throw in your tuppence-worth: http://www.theanswerb...s/Question977609.html )

All the best,

Spare Ed

[pastafreak]

Here is naomi's original enquiry about the missing question....hope this is of some help,Ed
http://www.theanswerb...y/Question978364.html

[AB Editor]

vivandorron - Posting on a thread asking me to answer doesn't make me answer any quicker, it is however, annoying, please stop it.

Spare Ed

[AB Editor]

Anyone remember the username of the banned?

Spare

[naomi24]

Thanks for getting back to me Spare. Yes, I understand that, but maybe if you could just have a quick glance at the 'zappable' in the more serious sections before pressing the red button? Such a lot of in depth research goes into some of the answers - especially with a subject as complex and diverse as religion.

From reading the answers to my original query in R&S again, apparently the offending poster was 'mikebravo. I thought the question was posted in R&S, but Quizmonster seems to think it was in B&S.

Thanks, I may well add my tuppence in your 'rules' thread. Good idea.

[pastafreak]

I've just looked on the link I supplied above ED....someone says the poster was a 'mikebravo'

[pastafreak]

oh..sorry naomi-your answer was not there when I started to type.

[snags]

''Individually pruning isn't always the best use of our time, and as such, there is occasional collateral damage''

^ Which is perfectly acceptable.

ABers moaned when volatile poster's/recognised troll's remarks and threads remained on AB to be viewed even when the thread starter had been 'zapped'... now they want every thread by a zapped user to be individually read and assessed before a decision is made as to whether the thread should remain or not lmfao...

[AB Editor]

Here To Subscribe To The Holy Ghost Thread http://www.theanswerb...dd&question_id=978008

[ummmm]

I would like to know how the Ed/Mods figure out it's a banned user. Sometimes they are here for ages before someone spots them.

[AB Editor]

Also, it can be seen on this page (but not the main one)

http://www.theanswerb.../?cftype=all_answered

[AB Editor]

///I would like to know how the Ed/Mods figure out it's a banned user. Sometimes they are here for ages before someone spots them.///

It is the spotting them part Umm. If we don't have a clue they're there (i.e. they're being good) we're unlikely to go looking.

[pastafreak]

There ARE variations in 'banned users'...those who have come on only to abuse and produce copious amounts of downright filth...and others who were banned due to poor judgement...the latter in many cases were sensible in their postings. Maybe this was one.

[ummmm]

But Ed...what if someone thinks they've spotted them and got it wrong?

[AB Editor]

...then we don't ban them. We've got plenty of back end data on those accessing the site to make judgements.

Also, are you suggesting you can't spot regular trolls/banned users from miles away?

Spare Ed

[ummmm]

If I'm really honest....I rarely can. Only if they are being naughty will I pay attention. But I'm the type of person who will babysit for someone so they can go to the hairdressers...and still not notice they've had their hair done.