Status of Members......what do they mean?

[Pyramid*]

During my recent holiday (in every sense of the word) - the phrase
'User banned' appeared under my username for a temporary ban.

User banned is also appearing under for some who have been permanently banned.

Banned appears under some members who have been permanently banned.

And then I found another one a few years ago, which says 'Ex Member' (I thought Tibbs didn't allow members to deregister - how does a member become an 'Ex'?)

http://thisisbigbrother.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2403514&postcount=111


Just wondering if someone could explain the differences and why they aren't consistent - it's a bit confusing when you see the phrases and they don't seem to have the same meaning.

Thanks.

[Vicky.]

User banned is when someone had been banned via infraction

Banned is temp banned via admin control panel(straight out ban)

Ex-member is the users custom status. You cant 'de-register' but you can change what your own status says :)

[Pyramid*]

User banned is when someone had been banned via infraction

Banned is temp banned via admin control panel(straight out ban)

Ex-member is the users custom status. You cant 'de-register' but you can change what your own status says :)

thanks but still confused. Maybe if I give examples, I might make more sense of what I mean.

Stacey's status shows 'User banned' - I understand she's pernabanned.

Others who have been recently permabanned, (Stephanie and / or Bettiepage I 'think') state 'banned' - and I think that's a permaban too.

Reason I'm asking is that when looking at it: there's no clear distinction on if the member will be back (if that makes sense).

Do you see why I'm confused??:conf:

[Vicky.]

Oh yeah, it will be because staceys permaban came from a huge infraction. And I did tommys and stephs straight from the control panel. Some people do it different ways, has the same end result...except for what it says under their name. Personally I just find it easier to straight out ban than go through filling out all the crap we need to do for an infraction :tongue:

Permabans are always announced in the ban list anyways, so people know they are not coming back at all.

[Pyramid*]

Oh yeah, it will be because staceys permaban came from a huge infraction. And I did tommys and stephs straight from the control panel. Some people do it different ways, has the same end result...except for what it says under their name. Personally I just find it easier to straight out ban than go through filling out all the crap we need to do for an infraction :tongue:

Permabans are always announced in the ban list anyways, so people know they are not coming back at all.

I thought Stacey was banned because of the type of unacceptable thing she did,(ie: I thought taking pics off here etc and using them elsewhere was a straight ban outright, not ifs or buts). rather than a build up of infractions - but that's not for me to questionj.

From other members point of view - it makes it difficult to determine what the actual status of a member actually means then, without going searching on another thread to find out.

Thanks for the explanation.

[CharlieO]

Stacey is reading this thread. the sense of evil is still lurking over us :devil:

[Pyramid*]

Stacey is reading this thread. the sense of evil is still lurking over us :devil:

LOL.

It's not so much Stacey or any other 'named' member - it's the status of members - and the confusion that different terms, meaning the same thing, that I think is unclear. That was just to be used as an example - as I didn't think perhaps my original OP maybe was clear in what I was asking. :blush:

[Jords]

Itd be more clear if it was something like;

Infract-banned: a ban due to build up of infractions
Banned: straight out ban
Perma-banned: wont be coming back

or something..

[CharlieO]

LOL.

It's not so much Stacey or any other 'named' member - it's the status of members - and the confusion that different terms, meaning the same thing, that I think is unclear. That was just to be used as an example - as I didn't think perhaps my original OP maybe was clear in what I was asking. :blush:

I completely understand the point of the thread its just she is revelling in the fact she is being mentioned. :nono:

[Vicky.]

I thought Stacey was banned because of the type of unacceptable thing she did,(ie: I thought taking pics off here etc and using them elsewhere was a straight ban outright, not ifs or buts). rather than a build up of infractions - but that's not for me to questionj.

From other members point of view - it makes it difficult to determine what the actual status of a member actually means then, without going searching on another thread to find out.

Thanks for the explanation.

She was.

But you can permanently ban people one of two ways. You can go through the admin control panel and give them a straight out ban. Or give them 999+ infraction points in one go.

[Pyramid*]

Itd be more clear if it was something like;

Infract-banned: a ban due to build up of infractions
Banned: straight out ban
Perma-banned: wont be coming back

or something..

This is my point Jords.

[Vicky.]

Itd be more clear if it was something like;

Infract-banned: a ban due to build up of infractions
Banned: straight out ban
Perma-banned: wont be coming back

or something..

These two dont matter tbh. Makes no difference whether someone was banned by infraction or just given a ban.


But the permabanned member should say that under them, I agree.

[Pyramid*]

She was.

But you can permanently ban people one of two ways. You can go through the admin control panel and give them a straight out ban. Or give them 999+ infraction points in one go.

That seems completely insane. Only my opinion but it seems crazy to give someone XXXXX infraction points - that will bring them to permaban status - rather than outright permaban. (I 'get' what you are saying Vicky, but I personally don't think it makes sense).

As I say, it's more the 'status' that shows under the names I was questioning, which you've answered so thanks for that.

[Niamh.]

That seems completely insane. Only my opinion but it seems crazy to give someone XXXXX infraction points - that will bring them to permaban status - rather than outright permaban. (I 'get' what you are saying Vicky, but I personally don't think it makes sense).

As I say, it's more the 'status' that shows under the names I was questioning, which you've answered so thanks for that.

Both of them equal a perma ban, I really don't see why you would have an issue with that:conf:

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

why is it even important -___-

[Vicky.]

That seems completely insane. Only my opinion but it seems crazy to give someone XXXXX infraction points - that will bring them to permaban status - rather than outright permaban. (I 'get' what you are saying Vicky, but I personally don't think it makes sense).

As I say, it's more the 'status' that shows under the names I was questioning, which you've answered so thanks for that.
Honestly...what difference does it make what the status is?

And I really dont get how it is 'crazy' to give someone 999 infraction points to permanently ban them either. As I said, personally I just go via control panel, but some prefer to do everything by infraction. Maybe so that there is records of the actual reason given to the user...and put where admin can see it, so that someone cant turn round and say bias about it.

[Pyramid*]

I completely understand the point of the thread its just she is revelling in the fact she is being mentioned. :nono:

Oh, I totally 'get' what you meant!!! :)


Since it would be incredibly unfair for me to comment - as she has no right to reply - I will refrain from doing so.

It was the status I was more interested in, not the actual member. :blush:

[Pyramid*]

Both of them equal a perma ban, I really don't see why you would have an issue with that:conf:

why is it even important -___-

Honestly...what difference does it make what the status is?

And I really dont get how it is 'crazy' to give someone 999 infraction points to permanently ban them either. As I said, personally I just go via control panel, but some prefer to do everything by infraction. Maybe so that there is records of the actual reason given to the user...and put where admin can see it, so that someone cant turn round and say bias about it.

Because it's a question that I wanted to ask, it was something I was unclear of.

I am allowed an opinion surely - and I made it clear why I was asking. It's nothing to do with 'bias' Vicky. As Jords also explained - they too can understand what I mean in a consistent status being used.

It was only a question - which has been answered, for which I thanked you for doing so Vicky.

[Vicky.]

Because it's a question that I wanted to ask, it was something I was unclear of.

I am allowed an opinion surely - and I made it clear why I was asking. It's nothing to do with 'bias' Vicky. As Jords also explained - they too can understand what I mean in a consistent status being used.

It was only a question - which has been answered, for which I thanked you for doing so Vicky.

All I meant was that some people prefer doing things by infraction so that there is record of exactly what they said to the member, and admin can see it if problems occur over it all. I was just pointing out how its not really crazy to want to do it that way. :)

Actually, it makes more sense to do it that way than the way I do it, thinking about it D:

[Pyramid*]

Both of them equal a perma ban, I really don't see why you would have an issue with that:conf:

I didn't know both of them equalled a perma ban.... that was precisely why I was asking the question - as the status of members isn't altogether clear. It's been answered so I'm not sure why I'm getting what 'feels' like aggro for asking a question.

You and Vicky have answered - so thanks for that.

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

Because it's a question that I wanted to ask, it was something I was unclear of.

I am allowed an opinion surely - and I made it clear why I was asking. It's nothing to do with 'bias' Vicky. As Jords also explained - they too can understand what I mean in a consistent status being used.

It was only a question - which has been answered, for which I thanked you for doing so Vicky.

:joker:

[Pyramid*]

:joker:

What are you laughing at Scott?

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

vickys biasissiism

[Pyramid*]

vickys biasissiism

I'm not really sure what this has to do with my question or indeed, the replies that V and N have taken time to explain. :conf:

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

i like pineapple

[Josy]

Right I'm going to close this now, the question that was originally asked has been answered.

[Pyramid*]

Perhaps some kindly mod would like to possibly intervene??