Burn wrote:Let me put it this way,
Has he ever abused other members? No.
Has he ever sworn? No.
Has he posted inappropriate material? Yes, and that was acted on accordingly.
Has he ever threatened staff with legal action? No.
Do people have to respond to him? No.
Can people ignore him? Yes. It's called the Foe list. I've pointed this out on numerous occasions, in some instances I've DIRECTED certain members to use the Foe list, but they have ignored me, ignored direction from a staff member, that alone should warrant a warning for THEM.
So where does the real problem lie? The guy who obsesses over a couple of different things and ignores all facts put in front of him, or the people who could simply ignore him but continue to respond and in some cases, attack him?
Consider that everyone.
I'd argue that the problem is still him simply because it isn't just a case of "put him on your foe list and he won't bother you" because he still does effect those who have done so by getting threads locked which contain, him aside, decent conversations.
He may only be guilty of relatively low level misdemeanors but he's still having a very negative effect on the forum. You just have to look over the past few pages of General Discussion, each locked thread has been locked directly because of him. Sure some of them have been just shite but others have been decent or potentially decent threads ruined by him.
You're not taking him out round the back of the stables and shooting him. You're just stopping an annoying bloke from posting on an internet forum and ruining the enjoyment of others. If anything, it's your public duty as site administrator.
