Should bans be public?

[Nomad]

I believe it should be based on the reason for ban. If the user is being banned for serious issues, we can make it public and let everyone know why a user is banned. For minor offense, discretion is a better approach.

 

[Henrywrites]

I believe it should be based on the reason for ban. If the user is being banned for serious issues, we can make it public and let everyone know why a user is banned. For minor offense, discretion is a better approach.

The reason for the ban is a key point. When such person is being banned for a serious offense, making it public is the least of what should be done at that moment.

 

[Nomad]

However, I also believe that ban should be a last option. If you start banning a lot of users, other users will become suspicious and might start becoming less active.

 

[Darth Cognus]

^ That's what nagged me with 'for minor offense' - bans should never be over something minor in the first place. Routine stuff like spammers/out of the gate trolls, sure.

 

[Xilia]

In my 15+ years of admining/modding on sites, I've only maybe had to deal with 5 ban cases the maximum, maybe 3-5 suspensions max? Anyway, we normally let the person know over PM/DM what's going on and then we ban. We have a publicly stated rule "Public discussion of potential bans or suspensions are not allowed" to avoid potential drama from brewing on a site.

 

[Tracy]

Only way you know that a user is banned over on my site is this

Of course, the website in the profile was a porn site, it shows she's hitting from an IP in the UK, but she says she's from Madrid and the IP is used with another user that is a spammer out shows to be out of Rome.
Spammers get marked as such, and their account gets banned also.
The discussion of why... not something that is discussed amongst users by staff.