# Sticky  Banned members



## Poxicator

Ive removed 3 threads concerning a banned member. 
I will continue to remove such threads as RFUK does not provide a platform for banned members to advertise and nor does it allow advertising for any service which cannot be executed within RFUK. So Facebook pages, ebay sales and commercial websites aren't allowed, as per our rules:

Reptile Forums - FAQ: RFUK Specific FAQ

•	NO threads advertising sites. This includes advertising facebook pages, groups and other forums.
•	NO signatures that include links to other reptile forums, including facebook groups.

I'm not going to argue about the service people provide if I haven't experienced that service. But nor will I provide a platform for advertisers who repeatedly blow their top by attacking others or providing veiled threats and then remove such threads within their own Facebook page. They are effectively moderating themselves!

And, I'm not keen on seeing sales of OW tarantula which are repeatedly handled - it's quite unnecessary and in my opinion quite irresponsible.

Those who believe the ban is in place solely because he was scammed are being a little naive. Bans are put in place because of a succession of issues. It runs on a point system which initially starts with warnings and often involves pm's too. Occasionally the disruptive behaviour needs to be curtailed quicker than the point system allows but this is rare and only involves those who obviously have no intention of following the rules they signed up for when they joined RFUK.
Here is the rules concerning infractions:
Reptile Forums - FAQ: Infraction Warnings


----------



## boxofsorrows

> NO signatures that include links to other reptile forums, including facebook groups.


Does that include The BTS and Invicta (since they both have Facebook pages/forums linked from their sites)? :whistling2:

:Na_Na_Na_Na:


----------



## Poxicator

From my understanding clubs and society websites are exempt from this.

Links to places that could be considered in competition are basically riding on the success of RFUK which, in business terms, isn't acceptable.


----------



## gambitgareth

Poxicator said:


> From my understanding clubs and society websites are exempt from this.
> 
> Links to places that could be considered in competition are basically riding on the success of RFUK which, in business terms, isn't acceptable.


What is a society? 
I would say many of the facebook groups would consider themselves a society - and rightly so, they self regulate, and offer advice, objectively speaking they do everything that bts does except charge - it seems futile to censor facebook groups imo - the bts will never be more of an authority than other facebook groups - largely because the bts relies on its members and publishes their work in their journals and also because current scientific papers are on open source platforms.

I think the current policy on banned members just needs to be extended to those plugging for business for banned members - as you say they are banned for a reason and frankly we dont want them in our community.. 

RFUK may have less active members - but it will always have active members so long as its here and the classifieds are free


----------



## Poxicator

I think that reflects your own personal views on the BTS which isn't the subject we're dealing with here.

RFUK hasn't censored any Facebook pages, they just don't allow such groups to piggyback off the forum.

Under FAQ the rules state:
"If you are found to be selling for a member who has received a classified or site ban, you may receive one yourself."


----------



## gambitgareth

Poxicator said:


> Links to places that could be considered in competition are basically riding on the success of RFUK which, in business terms, isn't acceptable.


Ok I appreciate that theres a different interpretation of the above quote; I was responding then without the context that it meant only censorship of 'the group or individual being advertised is run by or on behalf of a banned member'.


----------



## spidersnake

When you ban a member do you ban them via email address, IP address, both or other means?
If its just email, its easy enough to make up another email & sign up again.
If by IP address, said member can go to an internet cafe, library or click into a friends internet service but that would become a right pain in the arse after an extended time if you would excuse my french.
If by other means, what other means are there? I'm not trying to get round a ban or trying to encourage others to do so, I would like to know so I can implement them on my own forum discussing paranormal matters.
PM me if you feel this is too sensitive to mention on a thread.


----------



## Poxicator

I think you use the word censorship in the wrong context, we can't censor social media.

The rules are laid down as a guide, they don't cover every eventuality nor every interpretation. To do so would mean an extremely long set of rules that even fewer would read!


----------



## Poxicator

spidersnake, bans are put in place using the system software which relies on a number of identifiers of which Im not going to go into.
People can change the way they access the forum, but trouble makers often reveal themselves by the same actions that resulted in the initial ban.


----------



## oliwilliams

Poxicator said:


> From my understanding clubs and society websites are exempt from this.
> 
> Links to places that could be considered in competition are basically riding on the success of RFUK which, in business terms, isn't acceptable.


Could you check your own understanding with the other mods or admin then please? Its only wording, the link in your sig is to a club, you say thats fine. The bts links to another 'rival' forum you say thats against the rules, but its fine. Facebook is a group not a club? semantics.


----------



## Poxicator

Oli, are you seriously telling me you don't know the difference between BTS and RFUK? Surely that doesnt need explaining.

RFUK is a forum, they have their own FB. They have their own rules. Simples!


----------



## Tarantulaguy01

i've ran out of pop corn need some more :whistling2:


----------



## PJ88

I have questions about this...

1. Surely it is not the person who sold the animal, it is infact the person who bought the animal, the person/s to blame when handling the animal ?.

2. in your opinion, wouldnt this be considered a personal attack ?. I mean if a member put this in a thread, im sure it would be removed, and warnings would be handed out. If not bans.. 

3. Do you honestly find this appropriate?, surely a warning even to my self for commenting on the post is more appropriate than dropping to this level... 

Im sorry but rip this apart all you like friend. But to me this comes across as a personal attack from your own self belief or favor of friend, which I honestly believe to be the latter. I see no real justification to this act. In which case if I put up a thread exactly the same as this, but about you id be banned, why haven't you been ?, why have you not been warned ?. 

My point being, that this should not have been put up, and not a very good first impression if I do say so. That you would be willing in favour, without no evidence, to drag anouther through the mud as such... Post this proof of claim, ill retract this and appoligise. Otherwise id suggest removing such a claim.


----------



## Poxicator

PJ88 said:


> I have questions about this...
> 
> 1. Surely it is not the person who sold the animal, it is infact the person who bought the animal, the person/s to blame when handling the animal ?.
> 
> 2. in your opinion, wouldnt this be considered a personal attack ?. I mean if a member put this in a thread, im sure it would be removed, and warnings would be handed out. If not bans..
> 
> 3. Do you honestly find this appropriate?, surely a warning even to my self for commenting on the post is more appropriate than dropping to this level...
> 
> Im sorry but rip this apart all you like friend. But to me this comes across as a personal attack from your own self belief or favor of friend, which I honestly believe to be the latter. I see no real justification to this act. In which case if I put up a thread exactly the same as this, but about you id be banned, why haven't you been ?, why have you not been warned ?.
> 
> My point being, that this should not have been put up, and not a very good first impression if I do say so. That you would be willing in favour, without no evidence, to drag anouther through the mud as such... Post this proof of claim, ill retract this and appoligise. Otherwise id suggest removing such a claim.


Can you clarify some, or even all, of what you have just said there. :crazy::hmm:


----------



## oliwilliams

PJ88 said:


> I have questions about this...
> 
> 1. Surely it is not the person who sold the animal, it is infact the person who bought the animal, the person/s to blame when handling the animal ?.
> 
> 2. in your opinion, wouldnt this be considered a personal attack ?. I mean if a member put this in a thread, im sure it would be removed, and warnings would be handed out. If not bans..
> 
> 3. Do you honestly find this appropriate?, surely a warning even to my self for commenting on the post is more appropriate than dropping to this level...
> 
> Im sorry but rip this apart all you like friend. But to me this comes across as a personal attack from your own self belief or favor of friend, which I honestly believe to be the latter. I see no real justification to this act. In which case if I put up a thread exactly the same as this, but about you id be banned, why haven't you been ?, why have you not been warned ?.
> 
> My point being, that this should not have been put up, and not a very good first impression if I do say so. That you would be willing in favour, without no evidence, to drag anouther through the mud as such... Post this proof of claim, ill retract this and appoligise. Otherwise id suggest removing such a claim.


Huh? Is this in relation to the reply to my post? I just like seeing my picture everywhere and get bored on a night shift.
And while I know the difference between the sites the bits site is still a rival forum


----------



## Poxicator

Oli, I wouldnt consider the BTS as a rival forum, and considering that Ive used the BTS panel on RFUK since October 2008 and I only became a mod on RFUK in January 2011 it would seem that none of the moderation/admin team nor the owners consider it a rival forum either. And nor do they consider the tag against the rules.
I suggest, if you feel compelled to do so, that you pm either of the admin team or the owners, or report any of my posts for clarification on the signature.


----------



## PJ88

oliwilliams said:


> Huh? Is this in relation to the reply to my post? I just like seeing my picture everywhere and get bored on a night shift.
> And while I know the difference between the sites the bits site is still a rival forum


 
No no not at all, this is a reply to the so called admin... With his claims of anouther making threats ect... Sorry for the confusion


----------



## PJ88

Poxicator said:


> Can you clarify some, or even all, of what you have just said there. :crazy::hmm:


 
Of course. Can you tell me about your short memory span, and what language you speak, or explain your degree of understanding English ?...

Read your original post, then line this up with my reply, or is this troublesome for you ?. Honestly, you in my eyes, can't even answer nor understand the English language, puts questions upon weather you are even fit enough to even be admin. But beings you dont understand basic words such as "and", I will try my best to find a toddler that will match your criteria and understanding of the language it self.


----------



## RhacodactyBoy

toffee popcorn is my favourite


----------



## Poxicator

And who might PJ88 be?


----------



## Poxicator

Sorry folks but we've had to close this thread because 2 banned members have decided they want to continue to disrupt the forum.

Dave Balls, who has a joined under a number of accounts, enjoys a rant or 2 against the forum. 
I'm sure I know who the other is, but as I havent named that person directly I can't therefore have made a personal attack! However, checking the infractions of that person it amounted to 9 separate instances of infractions and 3 separate warnings and a multitude of pm's concerning behaviour. Within that timeframe plenty of opportunity was given to address their behaviour and to talk to various mods about how to proceed.


----------



## kato

*Admin Note:*

I hope I'm not treading on anyone's shoes here but as one of the two Admin on RFUK(the other being bothrops) I'd just like to say something about banned members.

There are very very very few Members that are Banned from RFUK, maybe a dozen in the five years that I have been on the Moderation Team. There have been more Bans, but these are normally Multiple Accounts, Banned Members or Spammers. Also to protect our Members, some Users are removed from certain sections, but this is very infrequent.

Of the few that have been Banned, they have been Banned deservedly so. Either ripping people off or not sticking to RFUK's very simple Rules and continually ignoring them. There are people out there that don't like us at RFUK, but that is their freedom of choice and we will not hold that against them. But speaking for myself, I do not like one bit when these banned members go off and lie as to why they are not on here anymore. Not once have I heard a Banned Member say why they were honestly banned.

Because of this, here at RFUK we have all our Community at heart and we do not want them subjected to these banned folk or even any scams that they are involved in. We as a Team look out for the best interests of our community and always try to. If anyone has an issue, either myself or bothrops will try to help you out amicably. Our ethos is to get along in a relaxed attitude and only step in if someone breaches the rules; yes, under previous Admin things have been tougher, but now hopefully there is no need for that stance. Stick to the simple rules and things will be fine. Break them continuously and the naughty step beckons.

Simon.
Administrator.


----------

