Of the WotC Forums and the OTT

[Morrus]

Uh, yeah, it kinda is. Maybe not over here, but different places have different policies.

It's not a policy thing. It's a logical thing about how messageboard software works. It doesn't make sense. "Banned with a tool that doesn't work very well" as opposed to "banned with a tool that works a bit better". It just means you're banned more effectively. It doesn't mean you're "more banned".

Being in a jail cell with 3 guards outside isn't a "greater" imprisonment that being in one with just one guard outside. It just works better.

 

[Cyclone_Joker]

It's not a policy thing. It's a logical thing about how messageboard software works. It doesn't make sense. "Banned with a tool that doesn't work very well" as opposed to "banned with a tool that works a bit better". It just means you're banned more effectively. It doesn't mean you're "more banned".

Being in a jail cell with 3 guards outside isn't a "greater" imprisonment that being in one with just one guard outside. It just works better.

No, IP bans were the final step. This was how WotC operated.

In fact, I can only think of one IP ban off the top of my head before all of ours.

 

[Morrus]

No, IP bans were the final step. This was how WotC operated.

In fact, I can only think of one IP ban off the top of my head before all of ours.

Then the policy literally makes no sense. They ban you. And then as a "final step" they ban you with a different tool?

The only reason not to IP ban someone when banning them from a messageboard is if you think the IP ban might accidentally catch someone else sharing it.

 

[PigKnight]

Then the policy literally makes no sense. They ban you. And then as a "final step" they ban you with a different tool?

The only reason not to IP ban someone when banning them from a messageboard is if you think the IP ban might accidentally catch someone else sharing it.

At least for the WotC, to use a metaphor, 24 hour bans were prison sentences where you could do your time and come out laster, whereas IP bans were the electric chair where once the button is pressed you're never coming back.

 

[Morrus]

At least for the WotC, to use a metaphor, 24 hour bans were prison sentences where you could do your time and come out laster, whereas IP bans were the electric chair where once the button is pressed you're never coming back.

But the duration isn't in any way connected to the tool. You can have a 24 hour IP ban or a permanent non-IP ban.

I think what we're discussing here is temp bans vs. permabans (which pretty much every forum on the planet uses, including this one - it's pretty much standard practice and built in to every commercial forum software package I'm aware of). Whether they use an IP tool or not is just the method.

 

[Cyclone_Joker]

But the duration isn't in any way connected to the tool. You can have a 24 hour IP ban or a permanent non-IP ban.

Well they didn't have temporary IP bans.

I think what we're discussing here is temp bans vs. permabans (which pretty much every forum on the planet uses, including this one - it's pretty much standard practice and built in to every commercial forum software package I'm aware of). Whether they use an IP tool or not is just the method.

IP bans and permabans were entirely different. Goldo has been permabanned a lot on WotC, but I don't think he was ever IP'd. The only IP I can think of was some guy who'd go around and post pictures of aborted fetuses everywhere.

 

[darjr]

I think what happened is that all ban's were dropped at the switch over. When they went to fix that it looks like they only, initially, had a permanent IP ban. Looks like some folks were allowed back in later.

 

[Morrus]

Well they didn't have temporary IP bans.
IP bans and permabans were entirely different. Goldo has been permabanned a lot on WotC, but I don't think he was ever IP'd. The only IP I can think of was some guy who'd go around and post pictures of aborted fetuses everywhere.

The important part of that is "permabanned" not "IP banned". The effectiveness of the tool is just not relevant to anything other than the ease of circumventing it. A ban is the withdrawal of permission to post; the technical method used to enforce that doesn't affect the binary condition of "permitted/not permitted to post".

The duration (temp, perma) is not a product of the banning tool. The point I'm trying to make is that folks seem to be saying one form of not being permitted to post is more "not permitted to post" than another. Which makes no sense!

But anyway. I've talked about this far longer than my interest in the subject of WotC's messagebaord software warrants.

 

[Kramodlog]

An IP ban isn't a "level" of punishment. A ban is a ban is a ban; it's the same measure. The fact that one tool is more effective at it than another is irrelevant.

Depends. One is permannent, the other is temporary. Hence the "temp-ban" expression. Maybe suspension would be more accurate and it is a difference of terminology on EW and the OTT.

 

[Kramodlog]

I think what happened is that all ban's were dropped at the switch over. When they went to fix that it looks like they only, initially, had a permanent IP ban. Looks like some folks were allowed back in later.

Nah, the OTTers were targetted. Some of us called customer service. The staff told them their account was terminated and they didn't have to give any explanations. Considering that everyone in the group, regardless of moderation history, were perma-IP-banned, plus that official line from WotC that we all got by email, I'd say it is not an accident.