Should discussion about now-banned users occur?

[PNWRoadgeek]

I used to do this all the time on the forum but now I'm realizing that im actually making fun of an old user on a forum. Should this be allowed or no?

[NE2]

Only if goat.

[PNWRoadgeek]

Only if goat.

I think NE2 is a great user, he understands.

[Roadgeekteen]

I'm fine with it and I don't really care as long as it's in the right threads and not spreading throughout the entire forum.

[PNWRoadgeek]

I'm fine with it and I don't really care as long as it's in the right threads and not spreading throughout the entire forum.

I agree here!  Because that way there can be goat quote threads.

I'm gonna make sure I say NO! whenever a thread that disowns goats pops up.

[Scott5114]

This is not a policy here, but it raises some points worth considering: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deny_recognition

[hbelkins]

This is not a policy here, but it raises some points worth considering: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deny_recognition

If they're banned, they don't know they're being made fun of.

Also, quoting a Wikipedia item instead of an AA Road Wiki item? For shame... 

 

[hotdogPi]

If they're banned, they don't know they're being made fun of.

MMM was very aware of the forum even after his ban.

[Roadgeekteen]

If they're banned, they don't know they're being made fun of.

MMM was very aware of the forum even after his ban.

banned users can still view the forum, including this board, they just can't post or view boards like fictional highways. MMM, P13, and Tolbs could all be looking at this post right now.

[Molandfreak]

If they're banned, they don't know they're being made fun of.

MMM was very aware of the forum even after his ban.

banned users can still view the forum, including this board, they just can't post or view boards like fictional highways. MMM, P13, and Tolbs could all be looking at this post right now.

I don't think this board is visible to non-members, either.

[Max Rockatansky]

Crash_It has rightfully earned all the ridicule he will forever receive in the road fan community.   Personally I don't care if people like him see the negative things I have to say about them.

[hotdogPi]

I don't think this board is visible to non-members, either.

Just checked in a private window. It is.

[Roadgeekteen]

I don't think this board is visible to non-members, either.

Just checked in a private window. It is.

I don't think this board is visible to non-members, either.

Just checked in a private window. It is.

Yeah I knew about this board before I joined. Always wondered if this board should be private as well.

[Henry]

I don't think this board is visible to non-members, either.

Just checked in a private window. It is.

I don't think this board is visible to non-members, either.

Just checked in a private window. It is.

Yeah I knew about this board before I joined. Always wondered if this board should be private as well.

Well, most boards already are (i.e. Fictional Highways and Road-Related Illustrations), so it wouldn't be a bad idea to make this one private too.

Since I've noticed how common it is to bring up those who have been banned and the subjects they created, I really don't see it as a problem, as long as it's in a civilized manner.

[Scott5114]

Also, quoting a Wikipedia item instead of an AA Road Wiki item? For shame...

Part of our management strategy on AARW is to run it as rules-light as we feel like we can get away with. (Given your personal preferences in that regard, I'm sure you understand and could probably state good reasons for doing so far more eloquently than I could.) As a result, there was a lot of backend governance cruft we intentionally didn't copy over from Wikipedia. Unfortunately, that does mean we also didn't copy over the more philosophical stuff either.

[jeffandnicole]

I don't think this board is visible to non-members, either.

Just checked in a private window. It is.

Stalker.  Slamming the ladder against the house was a giveaway you were out there too.

[Roadgeekteen]

It seems that the definitions of what boards are private are inconsistent. It doesn't make much sense for sports to be publicly available, but urban planning isn't. Urban planning seems more on the topic of a board than sports.

[Flint1979]

Crash_It has rightfully earned all the ridicule he will forever receive in the road fan community.   Personally I don't care if people like him see the negative things I have to say about them.

I was waiting for him to say that Michigan is flat as a pancake lol. Maybe he's finally crashed by now.

[TheStranger]

It seems that the definitions of what boards are private are inconsistent. It doesn't make much sense for sports to be publicly available, but urban planning isn't. Urban planning seems more on the topic of a board than sports.

if I'm not mistaken, this is specifically to make sure most of the people who are coming here actually are interested in the roads part of the AARoads forum culture.

I used to be on the USENET misc.transport.road newsgroup many years ago and there were times urban planning debates would take over that particular discussion venue like crazy.

[Max Rockatansky]

Crash_It has rightfully earned all the ridicule he will forever receive in the road fan community.   Personally I don't care if people like him see the negative things I have to say about them.

I was waiting for him to say that Michigan is flat as a pancake lol. Maybe he's finally crashed by now.

The alleged superiority of Illinois library architecture to that of Wisconsin was one of his latest soapboxes.

[formulanone]

Unpopular opinion: There's no sense in discussing people who have no ability to rebut their arguments, which leads to merely vacuous and loaded one-sided discussion.

On the other hand, Alanland probably would have become and not become a thing beyond all things.

[PNWRoadgeek]

I think crash it is fine for discussion as he did some very inexcusable things on this forum and they were not tolerated. Though I think mmm was a fine user as he never did anything out of line. I think geek11111 deserves a second chance as well.

P13 and tolbs? Absolutely not.

[Max Rockatansky]

Ehh...MMM knew exactly what he was doing. 

[Scott5114]

It seems that the definitions of what boards are private are inconsistent. It doesn't make much sense for sports to be publicly available, but urban planning isn't. Urban planning seems more on the topic of a board than sports.

If we don't want someone to join the forum just because they want to participate in that and nothing else, the forum is hidden when logged out. Urban planning is hidden to deter the NUMTOT crowd from taking an interest in the forum, since that's kind of counter to the main topic of interest.

I think geek11111 deserves a second chance as well.

He had ssssssssssseveral.

[webny99]

No comment on whether banned members should be discussed, but I do strongly support switching Suggestions & Questions to a members-only board. I can't think of any advantages of having it publicly viewable: pretty much everything posted in this board is just as well not seen by non-members, nor is there a reason for them to see it... and if there is, it's probably not for good reason.