Who Banned Mr. Mixx?

[Celegorm]

thats up for David to decide.

You don't know what all goes on then. David is on at one point in time a day usually. Mods are on real often. One spammer can send out a million spam threads between David's log off and log back on. If we cannot ban, how could we prevent it? I'm sure David would not like the extra work of going through and perm-banning every single spammer we get. He has enough to do without doing something a mod can easily take care of in three clicks of the mouse.

But dorfman, explain how this has anything to do with us needing rights changed? We though the account was hacked and it was reported to David. He's the one who made the action here, not a mod. Even a mod who can temp ban and close threads, nothing more, is still dangerous if hacked.

 

[setishock]

Dorfman is right in a way. If permissions are not set correctly the mods can do a hell of a lot of damage. I'm going to let ya'll know how we do it at CV and maybe David can take that in to consideration.

1> Mods can NOT ban. Instead the banned member is moved to a banned user group. A special hidden forum is set aside for the banned member and the admins only to get in and talk things over. If the issue can't be resolved the final solution is applied. And once the member is sent to the banned user group, they can't get back in to the main forum areas.
The banned user group is now an out of the box feature in the latest version of VB. Activate the infraction system and you have a pretty safe foolproof method of not only handling unruly members but keeping a trigger happy mod in check. They can't show you the door anymore, just another part of the forum.

2> Mods can NOT delete threads. They can do a soft delete which makes the thread invisible to members. Just mods and admins. The admin(s) will look over the thread and make the final decision. There is also another option for the mods. The thread can be moved to a hidden holding area where only mods and admins can gain access. This is the option that gets used most.

3> Mods can NOT mass do anything. That's my job.

We at CV and AA have never given as much power to a mod as you guys have. That just opens the door for a hacked mod account or a rouge mod to do a lot of damage. With limited or specially configured controls, you can minimize any damage, keep your mods in check, and make restoring things a breeze. VB 3.7 has so many mod controls you could fart in London and I'd know about it over here in North Carolina. I run 3.7 at AA and Buzz has 3.6.8 at CV.

 

[Celegorm]

Dorfman is right in a way. If permissions are not set correctly the mods can do a hell of a lot of damage. I'm going to let ya'll know how we do it at CV and maybe David can take that in to consideration.

1> Mods can NOT ban. Instead the banned member is moved to a banned user group. A special hidden forum is set aside for the banned member and the admins only to get in and talk things over. If the issue can't be resolved the final solution is applied. And once the member is sent to the banned user group, they can't get back in to the mian forum areas.
The banned user group is now an out of the box feature in the latest version of VB. Activate the infraction system and you have a pretty safe foolproof method of not only handling unruly members but keeping a trigger happy mod in check. They can't show you the door anymore, just another part of the forum.

2> Mods can NOT delete threads. They can do a soft delete which makes the thread invisible to members. Just mods and admins. The admin(s) will look over the thread and make the final decision. There is also another option for the mods. The thread can be moved to a hidden holding area where only mods and admins can gain access. This is the option that gets used most.

3> Mods can NOT mass do anything. That's my job.

We at CV and AA have never given as much power to a mod as you guys have. That just opens the door for a hacked mod account or a rouge mod to do a lot of damage. With limited or specially configured controls, you can minimize any damage, keep your mods in check, and make restoring things a breeze. VB 3.7 has so many mod controls you could fart in London and I'd know about it over here in North Carolina. I run 3.7 at AA and Buzz has 3.6.8 at CV.

We do points 2 and 3 here. We cannot delete anything, nor "mass-prune" or Mass move.

I like the Idea for the user group for our normal members, but for things like spammers and Goerge, it would just be a pain IMO.

 

[lhuser]

Seti has a dang good point there. I know what type of tasks I can do, and I personally think that is fair. It's not that my account will be hacked any day soon, nor will I turn the opposite direction, but I like the security restrictions, and also, as the title "moderator" says, is to moderate traffic, as in removing unwanted stuff, locking possible problematic threads, and so on.

Here, I did ban and did stuff, that was at a higher rank of administration, but you see...if we were to be not able to ban, then, only 1 user would have been: David. So, that in mind, call super mods, and enforce them to use a strong password.

^ thats because only two mods and david knew what was going on...

sometimes you have to hide the facts until you actually know what the facts are though, more communication is needed between the mods...

When unsure about something, you should just mention it...if you don't know, then we will understand. We're not thinking you're aware of everything either.

 

[root]

techically mods don't ban people they move then to a banned group already, and that banned group have no permissions to post.

just the same really. and david can ( and has before) reversed a banning decision, so this solution doesn't solve anything.

also we can't delete threads, we can send them to the moderation queue (make them invisible), or move them to a hidden forum, spam archive...

so those suggestions are already implemented.

 

[setishock]

It's been a while since I was behind the curtains Root. I didn't recall those being in place when I was modding here.

As for spammers, here's another feature of VB 3.7
Delete As Spam
With that in one click you ban the spammer or unrulely member and clean out all threads and posts attached to that member.
That would be dangerous to let just any one have but it's handy when you're getting your butt kicked by a spammer.

 

[lhuser]

Banning a user means that they can't post at all, and they have a page saying that they don't have sufficient privileges. When banned, you're going to be prompted that you've been banned.

The way you talk about banning is actually deleting a user, including posts.

 

[Fisher]

wow ive been gone for about 5 days and all of this has blown up. all i can say is that it made some enteraining reading for a couple of mins. crap joke that went bad, so what. i love CF it has its moments but who cares about those the rest of the time it all makes good reading.

 

[Zer0Cool]

U guys are the best! Threads like this, that's what gets me thru the day at my job lol time flies so much quicker.

 

[dorfman]

But dorfman, explain how this has anything to do with us needing rights changed? We though the account was hacked and it was reported to David. He's the one who made the action here, not a mod. Even a mod who can temp ban and close threads, nothing more, is still dangerous if hacked.

So, if a mod gets hacked or go crazy, they can not do much because they don't have all of the permissions do harm to the forum.

It ands extra security...and thefore you can add more mods so it balences out and you don't have to worry about what "type" of mod you have because they overall can't do much...meaning you wouldn't need as strict as you guys are.

But like I said, its all up to the Admin which is David.

It was just a suggestion so when something like this happens, David doesn't have to worry about the forum getting deleting and everyone being banned because a mod got hacked.

Thats all the point was...At no point was I arguing with you guys, or anything. David is the one that banned him. I'm only suggesting, if he did get hacked with the right permissions, it wouldn't be that big of a deal because he couldn't do much..

Also, David could have just removed his permissions for the time being and placed him as a regular instead of a mod, to figure things out.