Exactly. Make better rules. People shouldn't be punished for knowing how to follow simple rules.

And those who are unable to follow simple instructions should be punished. This isn't just the way it is here right now but life in general.

Again, if someone learned to tolerate people more and opinions they don't like, they would be able to post regardless of that what they say. People with different views lend to interesting conversations, not people with the same views. That's just an echo chamber.

I'm expecting grown people to act like adults and not lose their shit with they hear opinions they don't like. This is the internet,not your living room. I don't report or go to mods unless someone starts resorting to ad hominem. Its not like I'm flipping my shit, when someone posts numbers I don't like or when they're annoying. Also, I'm not advocating for the banning of the people I don't like because I don't like them, I tolerate and live with them.

Yes, it is. It's already an environment where intelligent discussion and an exchange of ideas. Do you follow those people around and see everything they post then you can't say that based on them just posting in a few threads. 

Not really, They can't ban someone most of the time for not breaking a rule. It checks their bias. It's another hurdle that has to be met before they can take an action. It's to limit the potential for biased actions. Without that check, carl could ban anyone he wants as long as the other mods agree with it. Their fellow mod team members are chosen by them so they can easily turn into a group of friends just agreeing on what one person wants versus being a group of people that are meant to keep eachother in line and prevent biased bans. It's a balancing act on a tight rope. I really like the mod team right now but their members change out alot so it can easily change for good or bad.

Stop trying to misrepresent my opinion. I said it fairly clear that I think it's about just banning a person just because ya don't like them. 

This is a forum with established rules. You were violating those rules by using ad hominem instead of arguing against my points. You lost that argument when you started to resort to those tactics because it's no longer a debate about ideas. You just resorted to mud slinging. I'm not obligated to tolerate insults by anyone on the net or in real life. At first, I asked you stop it but you double downed. After that,  I reported you for it then you doubled down yet again because of your arrogance so cock sure that you were skirting the rules enough to get away with it. You were banned over it. I'm showing thicker skin by staying and debating with you instead of pushing for permabanning people like you just because I don't like you. I also don't flip my shit when people make statements I disagree with, I debate with them like now. You guys are doing the opposite by overreacting to things being said that normal people would just deal with that aren't insults or being said for the lolz. Gee, I wonder who has thin skin and who doesn't.  

The reason why I'm mentioning walled gardens is because you guys want to remove anyone you don't like  for the purpose of "cleaning up the forum of troublesome people". All I'm suggesting is that we keep it as is right now. 

What did I write right after I said you misrepresented  my position? Yes, you did. You want to ban people because you don't like 'em. 

It's exactly what happened but you refuse to see it. You have a habit of treating your opinion as fact by default while acting like anyone disagree with you is an idiot. You were rightfully banned for taking digs over and over at me rather than argue against my points. I didn't use ad hominem as a crunch. i merely described your posts and some of your personality traits. You just act in a very arrogant manner and that clouds your judgement. I wasn't banned for flaming, right?  If you want to keep talking about the actual topic at hand, I'll debate with ya. 

I'd like to thank everyone for the mostly civil discussion regarding it. It's seen an expected mixed response and I'm happy with that. I guess it's up to the head mods if they ever want to introduce such a measure.

To answer some concerns and criticisms...

If it was used, it would of course be a rare and hardly ever used means of moderation. As a team, the moderators know exactly who the trouble causers are and where problems are popping up. We have tools to track members, we have tools to keep an eye on who's getting moderated consistently and we have historic data to show behavioral trends. We know where the problems lie. The decision wouldn't be taken by one person, but the team as a whole.

And thanks to CGI for handling some issues while I was away from the thread.

GAF's moderation was lambasted because of they way they handled political discourse, it had nothing to do with an echo chamber mentality in gaming or sales discussion. To paint the situations as being similar is idiotic and you should know better than to spread FUD in that way if you actually knew what GAF was like.

I wanted to see whether people would be accepting of the proposal, not on who the members were who needed to be banned. I wanted a civil and reasonable discussion, not childish finger pointing. I asked you to stop and you ignored me so you were removed from the discussion. I gave you the out and you disregarded it. Simple as that.

You weren't interested in any discussion, you just wanted to roll in and start poking at Kerotan. 

You weren't helping the situation, you were exacerbating things. That's why I asked you to stop the shit.

This is somewhat addressed by Miguel_Zorro in the OP.

I don't think we should ever shut down a discussion, but we have the right to ask people not to participate if they're being problematic. If discussion is getting nowhere and veering off into different and off topic discussions, then it's fair to move it along to somewhere else.

Wrong, it wasnt finger pointing. Stop accusing me of that shit. Its annoying af at this point.

After your first post on this topic kerotan posted this...  http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8674588

I saw your post before kerotan posted his response and i didnt say anything (aka finger pointing)

I followed up after he posted... http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8674609

I quoted him basically to help him out with the situation. Like he didnt have a clue it was about him. By me telling him instead of throwing him out of MC threads maybr he should restrain himself for mentioning anything nintendo.

Im finger pointing according to your logic when i was just trying to help but you didnt finger point any1 because you didnt specifically name the user despite 90% of any1 reading your post knew who you were referring too.

Your attitude towards me right now sucks and i was banned for a dum reason. Again i dont have anything agaisnt you but stop coming at me with BS. 

Can you point that out to me? The only things I found that are close are the mods' rights to ban certain users from the mod thread and for people to take specific topics to their own threads. What you did didn't seem like either of those: it just seemed like you losing your temper and not wanting to discuss with tbone anymore.

Of course you were finger pointing. Re-read what you said. "Btw not sure if you havent notice but if im correct i think this means toward you".

Like I said, you weren't helping things at all, no matter how much you think you were helping. It wasn't about him, specifically. It's about a group of people.

You have a bad history with Kerotan, so you're the last person this community needs to try and "help" him understand something. The irony here is that you of all people are trying to pin the problems on one person. It's not about one person. You've had a far worse mod history than Kerotan throughout 2017 with your arguments and thread disruptions and for many people you would also be one of the "problematic" users who needs the boot. Sure, Kerotan can drop into that group too. As could the likes of Lawlight, Azuren, RolStoppable, Hynad, gentii, vivster or Goodnightmoon just to name a few. I could go on and on and on.

I could list you an endless number of people we get countless reports about who could be seen as problematic from varying corners of the forum. I could go through a list of reports sent in by DonFerrari that would make your head spin. The point is that it's not for you to confront another member and accuse them of being the problem, when the reality is that this isn't just one person. Snowball effect. You start to point the finger at Kerotan and then others start to point fingers at members either a) not participating in the discussion or worse, b) members in the discussion who don't know when or how to ignore criticisms. Remove the problem (in this case, you) and the discussion continues without issue.

You were banned because I told you to stop attacking Kerotan. You ignored the warning. I removed you from the discussion. It couldn't be any simpler.

Oh, so you think that I was shutting down the discussion? No. Not at all. As you can see after tbone51 was removed, discussion carried on naturally. I have no problem with that.

In the OP it states that normal forum rules apply in this thread, so I have the right to ask someone to not attack another member if I don't think it's valuable to the discussion. I gave him an out on that one which he ignored. He was free to continue discussion in here right up until he blanked my warning, so I gave him the break. 

I don't exactly agree with everything you're saying back to me Carl but it doesn't really matter and you do make a good point.

I'd like to ask you a question. We obviously have these problem members that would need to be removed. While I'd not blame you for wanting to do it, is it fair the mod team would say for example

"OK so today we brought in this knew policy. Users X, Y and Z you are all getting the boot. Bye bye."

Or alternatively would the mods announce the knew policy and say, problematic users you've been warned. Personally if it happens I think that's the fairest policy.

As much as I want the place cleaned up so we can have smoother discussions it would be very harsh to take the former approach.

I suppose you could say he was, looking back at it. I should have slapped him on the wrist also. However...

tbone faced consequences because he didn't stop when I asked him to. He had an out, he didn't take it. He wasn't necessarily banned for the pointing fingers, he was banned for ignoring my warning when I told him to stop it.