Any more news about banning? Locked

Started Oct 8, 2009 | Discussions thread
This thread is locked.
dnjake Senior Member • Posts: 2,702
Re: A strange situation here

Tim in upstate NY wrote:

Olga Johnson wrote:

The rude ones return with other nicknames right away. They don't realize that when they kick one of the good guys out, it's mostly a permanent loss. That's because it might be a privilege to be a member, but it's also a privilege for the site to have a member who mature and full of knowledge and helpful information.

. . . . DPR's reputation is pretty good in circumstances like this over the years. Not every banning has been universally acclaimed and maybe a few bannings were a little overdue in the eyes of many . . . but . . . To remain absolutely silent about this particular situation while getting blasted by almost everyone . . . well . . . . You wonder what's really going on here.

. . . . I remember when David Kilpatrick was banned from the SONY forum some time ago and the uproar was tremendous but at least DPR wasn't afraid to talk about why they did it and at least you knew what the reason was.

. . . . Now, all we get is silence. Very strange.

In general, the reasons for banning people in the past have been pretty clear. One category has been people who clearly were pursuing their own commercial agenda with their DPR Posts. It is true that David Kilpatrick's posts had a relatively high content value. But it is not hard to understand the reason for banning him. Another category has been people who just would not let some controversy go. I actually thought Myshkin has some valid points. But everybody understood why he was banned. Yet annother category has been people who were a bit too dominating and who had a tendency to make personal attacks in the heat of a debate. Usually those people got several chances. I have not been following JAK's posts for a while. So maybe he began to slip into this category. But his pattern aways seemed at the cooler, rational, knowlegeable end to the DPR spectrum to me. The facts that nobody seems to know why he was banned and that dpreview chooses not provide an explanation really calls dpreview's policies into question. Certainly its appropriate for dpreview to maintain a strong set of policies on allowed forum content. But that goal should be served by a simple explanation of JAK's infraction. The fact that nobody understands it at a minimum calls the clarity of dpreview's rules into question. The absence of any kind of official response also raises questions about the state of dpreview's leadership. In the past, Phil was ready to address this kind of issue when it arouse.

-- hide signature --

David Jacobson

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow