Another issue that people don't seem to be considering is that of libel.

If DVDTalk moderators start making public announcements about why certain members were banned, and one of the accusations turns out to be untrue -- Geoff could then easily be sued for libel. I don't think we want to start getting into a pattern where DVDTalk moderators start regularly accusing members of stuff in a public forum -- even if 99.9% of the time it turns out to be correct.

In today's sue-happy environment, this is a real concern and one I'm sure that Geoff would like to avoid if at all possible...

I'm happy to assume that any members that were banned were banned for good reason. This isn't a democracy -- it's Geoff's site and he has given his moderators the power to ban members who break the rules. While I may be curious what that reason is, I understand why it may never be made public.

Uh, dude, don't get paranoid.

<i>People</i> might be sue-happy, but judges (and most attorneys) aren't idiots. This falls so far short of libel that no one would even bother entertaining an idiot who hoped to bring such a suit.

Libel (and its cousin slander) only stand when the allegation is 1) false <i>and</i> 2) offensive. And we're not just talking "you're a jackass" offensive, we're talking "I'm dead-serious when I say that Orson sleeps with sheep" offensive - something scandalous and intended to injure.

Banning someone because they seem to be a troll, or they are probably a returning banned member, falls so far short of this level it's just ridiculous.

- David Stein

easily? not quite. a suit like that most likely wouldn't go anywhere.

DJ

Why not? Because you think it's silly? That doesn't matter as far as the law is concerned.

If a person "working" for DVDTalk makes a public statement accusing a member of something that later turns out to be not true, it's libel -- plain and simple.

If a newspaper did that, they could be sued. Same thing for a web site.

Additionally, even if the suit itself were to be ultimately unsuccessful, Geoff (and his lawyers) would still have to deal with it. Better to never make the statements in the first place and avoid the hassle...that's all I was saying.

A suit could be brought easily. But it's a moot point anyway. People need to quit bugging the mods everytime they take action. If someone is banned, the mod had a good reason for doing it. We don't need to know why. We can read the rules, if they were banned they broke one or more of them, or are a banned member back under a different name. The latter is exactly why we've seen a lot of bannings lately. There's been a lot of losers trying to coming back with new names lately. Just let the mods do their jobs. If you're really that curious about a particular banning, just e-mail a mod and ask. But there's really no reason to be that curious. If someone is banned they've done something serious, otherwise they would have just been warned or suspended.

that's all well & good, but i've seen a lot of such threats over the years on the net and they tend not go anywhere. what's to sue over when DVD Talk posts reasons for bannings? "user so-and-so was banned because he spammed the Reviews forum." i certainly wouldn't take that case, and i can't imagine that any attorney who likes making money would, either.

newspapers usually have lots of money and make them worth suing.

DJ

the only thing that I can see that might be a benefit from telling us, although most of it seems like needless gossip, is this: there seems to be a LOT of banned members constantly returning and I think other members, like myself, could help spot some of them and email a mod.

I know that if I knew who was banned that it'd be far easier for me to spot these people and help you mods out a little. You seem to have bigger issues at hand then weeding through new members posts to see who looks like who. It's easy enough to change ips so you can't figure out that way, so having a group of people like a "neighborhood watch" of sorts could be of benefit.

That is about the only good I can see that would come of posting about who and why someone is banned. The rules are there we know why people are banned. Now who is banned is an entirely different story.

I posted in the thread that was deleted so I'll post again in this one.

The only realy reason why anyone would want to know why someone was banned (IMHO) is out of morbid curiosity or nosiness. It is easy to find out why someone was banned, either A) e-mail them and ask B) e-mail a mod and ask or C) read the forum rules because it's pretty likely that the breaking of the rules is what caused the banning in the first place.

I personally believe that reprimands should be a private matter between the administrators, moderators, and the offender. Many times, the act that got the person banned is something that, on hindsight, may be rather embarrassing and to rehash it could only add to the humiliation.

If a person really cares about why someone is banned is isn't just being nosy, they really need to just e-mail the person who was banned and if the e-mail is not available they ought to just MTOB.

no offense to anyone who wants a thread about bans and suspensions...I just find the whole thing entirely unecessary.