Should we add into our forum rules a manner for people to get unbanned via vote from the public?

Total number of votes: 2

50% Yes, a method should be set up to allow the unbanning of members.

50% No, people who are banned are banned for a reason and will come back at the will of the management.

Mar 30, 17 / Tau 05, 01 15:43 UTC

Should we add into our forum rules a manner for people to get unbanned via vote from the public?  

Copied from here to allow a vote. https://asgardia.space/en/forum/forum/general-discussion-14/topic/what-are-the-durations-of-bans-4622/

If this is to be a democracy, eventually, how about allowing we citizens the opportunity to some self-determination in this limited instance. Set up an area of the forum for people who are banned to be able to make their cases and then people can vote whether they should remain banned or be allowed back in. I had a similar setup back on a forum I used to run. Moderators will provide their evidence for the ban, and then the accused gets their say, then the people (perhaps 5 selected by both parties, to keep privacy concerns in mind) get the final vote. Tie votes indicate no change.

So, do we as Asgardians believe this is a fair method that we should officially request of our 'leaders' or is this unnecessary?

Mar 30, 17 / Tau 05, 01 19:04 UTC

There is a thread set up for this discussion in Feedback. Please keep all comments/posts on the post mentioned below. This post will be locked in order to continue on the mentioned link. Thank you. https://asgardia.space/en/forum/forum/feedback-11/topic/banning-of-members-4624/

Apr 2, 17 / Tau 08, 01 00:04 UTC

There is a thread set up for this discussion in Feedback. Please keep all comments/posts on the post mentioned below. This post will be locked

Well done. Lock the thread, that will stop further replies. Banning people will also serve as an effective form of censorship, clearly you know what you're doing here. As evidenced by my posts.

With this in mind To the moderators/admin

````You cannot stop me. I had hoped this wouldn't develop into a competition, as previously mentioned you will lose. Even if you actually understood security and applied some, you would still lose. I'm trying to stay away from here, do not give me cause to come back and I will stay away. I am not known for my patience, soon I shall be far less civilised.

I bring you an offer. I offer to replace each post of mine you remove without my permission with double the amount you remove. To accept my offer you have only to remove a single post. I further offer to automate this. I additionally offer to conduct a complete security audit of this server and your personal equipment and to make very public the results.```

I could just ban you all now - if this is what you want, just say so. I'll happily comply. As you removed 8 messages last time, I shall leave more this time. Do you see how this game works?

To the Citizens of Asgardia:

First I am pleased with the general response - not that I interpret this as you are somehow defending myself, I'm happy to be the target if it allows for something to come in over my shoulder and score a better hit. In the larger picture I'm not an important detail. On the scale of what I have sacrificed, this is nothing. What pleases me is you're asking questions of how such things are handled. This is wise. I do however stand as an example of what this earns you in this "society" so you must decide for yourself which would be more important to you, thinking for yourself or being a part of this collective. The self-propelled will be problematic, unless you're propelling yourself precisely within the unpublished intended directions decided in secret meetings behind closed doors. This isn't going to be used as an excuse to get rid of you, they are not quite that simple(close) but instead you will be watched intensely and where infractions of AuP/ToS can be applied they shall be. Selectively targetted enforcement of AuP/ToS is a concept you should consider deeply in your descision.

These people are not your "leaders". At best, they are the PA to their secretary. Glorified babysitters for this "service" that have to advertise the fact that they are babysitters in the hope of wowing you with their "position of status" (lol, babysitter is something to be embarrassed about, and anyone eager to take on the pile of shit that comes with such a position should be intensely questioned as to the motives). They have no "position of power", no decisive capacity in anything that actually matters. They are simply 'tards that have been generally picked up on FB - the first place you look for finding people proving themselves incapable of anything serious - after demonstrating a lack of ability to think coherently for themselves they are accepted into the fold. They are the shit shovellers. I was trying to give the entire operation the benefit of the doubt, as it's so immature help it where it can't even see it needs it. That stops today. I do not appreciate completely wasting my time.

The "leaders" do not tread these forums, it appears. Unless someone pastes them a link via skype. Save a few that have sparodic interest and even lesser input. They should really make some effort to make their computers secure, if they are intending on running a country. You would think, as a community, if they valued your input then they would be in that community with you. Providing feedback that can and will lead to more productive input. Providing more tangible substance to what basically amounts to collective imagination. Something else you should possibly consider questioning. As well as the "hiring policies" that ensure those that serve as go-between form a circle jerk each swallowing the shit they are shovelled whilst in a competition to declare how nice it tastes unwilling to form their own opinion for the "downgrade in status" that shortly follows.

Personally - as I and others have said before - I feel the way this sort of thing should be handled is transparently. There needs to be a proper greivance procedure. Lacking a proper - transparent - greivance procedure I've contacted the person responsible for my ban. I've stated my position, applying logic and sense. They have had opportunity to rectify their mistakes. I'm sure the effect of this was largely pronnounced - and yes, sarcasm is more than a seven letter word. They have had independant corroboration of the community perception and still done nothing about the problem they have caused. Even not knowing how to fix the problem, they should know how to apologise - and the opportunty to has been given.

The thing to note most prominently is the ban was caused by attempting to explain the core principles of Asgardia in the face of some pretty intensive and determined retardation. This term is legitimate as it does exhibit delayed or reduced ability - in this case thinking - that would be expected from anything above the IQ of "houseplant". The actual reasoning for the ban was for responding in a similar manner to which posts was directed at myself. Pertainence suggests reviewing all my posts(there's many, 1415, and some are quite long. Many will get bored in the attempt, but some may find something interesting and learn something.) observing how much "abuse" I emit, and then try to consider the reasoning behind. I am reasonable, despite some other folks attempts to paint otherwise. Every move I make is also setting up for at least nine steps in front(one step ahead of the spider is still eight steps behind me. You think you see an opening? I want you to make that move). Additionally, if you could be bothered, weigh it as a percentage to the total input. If you're really bored, attempt to weigh the value of the content, and then the detriment of "insult". I've not bothered, I'm simply confident any "metrics" applied will only paint me in a good light. I always take the moral high ground, it's remarkably defensible and having somewhere firm to place your feet cannot be undervalued. It might inspire accusations of ego and the possession of some form of superiority complex but it simply stems from not liking being wrong, not liking making mistakes. To the point of actually learning enough to do something about it. Thinking before acting, confirming before saying. Educating myself on the topic as required.

I honestly question if the "administrators" would actually be capable of removing a ban, I'm not sure anyone has held their hand and showed them how to do so yet. It's not difficult to add a field that has been deleted from a DB(a sane person would of handled this a lot differently in the backend) that's 6-8y/o shoolchild shit so may take them until 2025 to learn... You shouldn't need to tell an Administrator, they should already know. When I first took (lawful) control over an 8000+ computer network that stretched over several countries(and yes, that was in my care wih me being held accountable for it's lack of operation, along with the AS/400 containing billions(dollars, US) of chemical formula that powered the company which was in one of the local sites. Access to that database and the on site labs was a serious perk) the only "training materials" I required appeared to be the BOFH articles - as apparently I was far too kind to the users, but experience of enough of them for enough time will cure you of this. It's amazing how the industrial accident rate drops when I leave places. I was 15, so naive on these matters. I suspect them to be older, and thusly have more experience. Especially holding that sort of position, in a nation-wide initative. And in before twats like Brandon7 when my time came to leave the entire situation was a lot stronger than before I arrived and the letter of accomodation that accompanied my departure reflected the regard the company held me in and secured me several other positions in the future. Positions you can only dream about.

And yes, you should be vastly concerned that some "interwebs random" knows more about and exhibits more control over the system they are running that they do. And there's lots more to be concerned about - like how you can walk off with an entire copy of the database, all of the contents. Names, Addresses etc. - more importanly question how they can be told this is possible, and some things that should be stopping it and several months later it's still possible. Or why they felt the need to add in tracking initatives to attempt to map your contact web(amusingly, before introducing the concept of "contacts" properly). There's quite a lot of "behind the scenes" things that might deserve some serious examinination, then questioning. I would strongly advise you seek them.

I bid thee farewell and good luck.

You will need it.

Remove this message and it will be put back. You might save yourself some effort and a lot of looking shady.

Apr 2, 17 / Tau 08, 01 00:20 UTC

Hello all,

You'll see above exactly why he was banned. Unfortunately, we have to take severe steps in this case and blocked his account from login. We don't like to do it as we would like members banned from the forum a chance to participate in other Asgardia activities but this community member has not left us any choice.

I am sorry but the ban remains for this community member and his recent actions just add to the list of rule infractions.

Regards,

Rebekah Berg, Lead Community Administratory, Asgardia