E-mail filters are a good idea, but really… it doesn’t bother me and I don’t mess around with filters too much, anyway. I probably should. :)

The guidelines of the community are tied to the goals of the community. Banning is a part of life if your community is relatively active and you have meaningful guidelines that are evenly enforced and that have meaning.

Using “weighty” words makes sense. Do you have an example of what you mean, in practice, Steve?

Jacque, that’s a nice one. lol. :)

Thanks,

Patrick

I will admit that I once welcomed someone to ‘banned camp’. But I agree, that you need to remain professional, decide if it’s an actual threat or someone with too much time on their hands and go on. It’s not worth your time and energy to argue with someone. If they were wrong and you banned them, that’s pretty much it.

I’d also wonder if maybe if my rules were so strict that it’s leading to banning so many people. The only people I’ve banned were outright spammers. Everyone else I’ve been able to deal with, without banning, so far. Maybe it’s that some discussion boards attract people so ridiculous that banning is the only answer?

I’ve discovered over time that how a forum is constructed will determine whether people can think they can join and cause trouble. A couple of things that I think help with this is to use some “weighty” words in the board’s name and description so that those who like to normally get out of hand *know* the discussion board is a serious endeavor. In short, do anything you can to make it clear that the board’s design and purpose excludes frivolousness. After that, of course, have reasonable rules for discourse (but note that most people really don’t read the rules).