Negative Rep should equal Automatic Suspension/Ban

[360crazy]

I haven't been here that long but...........

Trolls>>>>>>>> Prejudice black racists

 

[LA Fisher]

Nah... I don't think the rep system needs to be used like that.

I think that the denouncing of trolls SHOULD be paid more attention to. Like that mariahcooper broad, that mulatress, that Mr. Black, why the fukk aren't they banned already? When faced with people like that, I think that TLR should have the assurance that if a thread was made calling for them to get banned and providing quotes exemplifying why, the admins would at least give it the consideration it deserves. But of course nothing like that would happen.

Not everyone with neg rep deserves a ban, hence why the neg rep = ban wouldn't be effective: it'd result in too many silly bans.

If the denouncing of trolls was effective, we wouldn't even need something like that, imo.

unless they ran into a neg train, thats different
I do think we should have the options of banning members from our own threads

 

[Elle Driver]

unless they ran into a neg train, thats different
I do think we should have the options of banning members from our own threads

 

[Mr. Negative]

I used to think this, as well.

but cats can be BRUTAL when it comes to burying someone with neg rep. Sometimes it's justified, sometimes, eh.....

Although it's impossible, I DID propose like a Negative Zone where either a certain number of negs would only allow you to post in a sort of... prison sub-forum for a certain amount of time...

or you would be automatically be put on global ignore which isn't a ban, but no one would be able to see your post but you and other ignored members.

release would be pending mod review.


I also wish they'd stop bullshytting and kill alt troll accounts by IP. But I understand.

 

[I'm Billy FUCO!!]

I swear, nikkas keep suggesting that shyt like they honestly don't see the obvious ways that it can be abused/misused

 

[BrothaZay]

u got a problem ?

 

[WheresWallace]

unless they ran into a neg train, thats different
I do think we should have the options of banning members from our own threads

That's what the appeal is for. When the mods see that all the negs was from some corny ass jerk circle then the suspension or ban can be lifted

 

[Elle Driver]

u got a problem ?

Banning certain members from threads?

 

[WheresWallace]

Nah... I don't think the rep system needs to be used like that.

I think that the denouncing of trolls SHOULD be paid more attention to. Like that mariahcooper broad, that mulatress, that Mr. Black, why the fukk aren't they banned already? When faced with people like that, I think that TLR should have the assurance that if a thread was made calling for them to get banned and providing quotes exemplifying why, the admins would at least give it the consideration it deserves. But of course nothing like that would happen.

Not everyone with neg rep deserves a ban, hence why the neg rep = ban wouldn't be effective: it'd result in too many silly bans.

If the denouncing of trolls was effective, we wouldn't even need something like that, imo.

In the OP I said a certain neg rep level. Im not saying one neg rep should equal the user being banned.

after -1,000 reps its clear that the user is just a troll. Right then and there they should be suspended. After suspension if they still troll they should be banned.

After becoming banned, they should have the chance to appeal the ban and if the ban was the result of a neg train then the user can be re-instated.

I don't see the flaw in that.

 

[BrothaZay]

Banning certain members from threads?

Yes. Some members dont have any purpose in ur threads but to come in and talk shyt or say a lame ass joke.
No matter what the thread is about, their intention is to derail it.
You should have the option to ban certain members from YOUR threads if you want.
I don't see a problem with that.

 

[360crazy]

In the OP I said a certain neg rep level. Im not saying one neg rep should equal the user being banned.

after -1,000 reps its clear that the user is just a troll. Right then and there they should be suspended. After suspension if they still troll they should be banned.

After becoming banned, they should have the chance to appeal the ban and if the ban was the result of a neg train then the user can be re-instated.

I don't see the flaw in that.

What if that user posted an unpopular opinion and received a shyt load of negative rep? Does that equate to troll? What if a user thinks the word cac should be banned and expresses that but gets hit with a shyt load of neg rep? Does that equate to a troll? Your suggestion could be easily exploited and isn't fair.

 

[Elle Driver]

Yes. Some members dont have any purpose in ur threads but to come in and talk shyt or say a lame ass joke.
No matter what the thread is about, their intention is to derail it.
You should have the option to ban certain members from YOUR threads if you want.
I don't see a problem with that.

It's a community for a reason breh, everyone's opinions are welcome, regardless of whether or not they talk shyt or whatever. There's an ignore button for a reason. I've put that to good use. It's as if that user doesn't exist, you won't see their replies in any thread. Which makes the entire premise of banning users from threads null and void.

Btw, mods have banned certain posters from certain subforums if all they do is derail and talk shyt (aroman was banned from HL and TLR for that very reason). You can always let them know and they'll probably do so themselves.

 

[Dameon Farrow]

Is it really that serious? On a side note, some folks would just get in their feelings and abuse it. And then the site mods have to come up with an appeal system. but at the same time

 

[MikeBrownsJob]

Hit me with that negative 1000.

Someone do the honors

OP

 

[the cac mamba]

this is 100% truth

look at the2013 new member, mariah ****, the rhyme king. its not neg trains, its them bein shytty posters. 1000 negs should equal