0
5

[–] IntellisaurDinoAlien 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

I think outright ban is the way here, and if you earn that it's justified. Shadowbans are a shitty way to treat users.

0
5

[–] X7715491 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Outright ban with a warning system (to give a second chance and to explain the violation) should be the way to go. Moderators should ban whoever breaks their rules for their subs, but it should not be site wide.

Shadowbanning a real person for any reason is just shitty.

0
4

[–] IntellisaurDinoAlien 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Agreed, site wide bans for gross violations are ok by me too, if Atko feels it's right.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
1

[–] absurdlyobfuscated 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

It makes sense when you have tons of spam and want to neutralize accounts so it can all be handled automatically. They did a couple things wrong with the implementation, though. The only thing it should do is have all posts and comments for a user auto-spamfiltered. It shouldn't hide their profile, there's no reason to do that, and it shouldn't affect mod abilities like making you unable to approve posts. If an actual spammer is a mod of something, they should be stripped of that or have their subreddit banned. Then the other more serious thing they did wrong was to start using it for regular users as a passive-aggressive punishment for breaking the rules. I understand that the rules are important and doing things like following meta threads and voting on linked comments can be damaging and unfair to users, but when you can just click around carelessly and suddenly find your account stealthily banned, it creates an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty. Not to mention how disrespectful that is to people.