Forum:3 Warnings and Ban Rule

Ok this forum is a attempt to stop all this crap that has been going on for a while with people ganging up on other users and asking for them to be banned,so the rule is basically to try to avoid all these conflicts,so a vote would be the best way for us to democraticaly choose if this rule shall pass or not and we make this wiki more productive with less wars and hate. User:X-RAPTOR 01:14, May 19, 2012 (UTC)

Discussion
I don't understand any of this. Please explain. 01:19, May 19, 2012 (UTC)

Well, in my opinion, the forums are kinda useless. If you look at recent forums, they brush past the main topics and focus on attacking users. And, in all honesty, I think they are useless. If a user receives a ban warning, then he knows that he is doing something wrong, and should stop there. If he feels like he is doing the right thing, it can be discussed on the user's (user who recommended for the ban, admin who issued warning) talk page or on the talk page of the article in question (if it is an arching issue that needs to be solved, then a forum could be created). And even if they don't get the first warning, then they get two more chances to rectify their behavior before they are banned. I think this is simpler and faster than extended forums that drag an argument over several weeks. 01:20, May 19, 2012 (UTC)

http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/5674/65516794.png SeaTerror 01:21, May 19, 2012 (UTC)

--Legato Bluesummers 01:24, May 19, 2012 (UTC) I don't have an opinion on this yet, but when I do I will edit this comment and post my answer.

Personally, i feel the way we should do it is, no tolerance, no holds barred. You break the rules the admins explain you serve your ban, but u have the right to petition once. if u get denied to bad, if you get approved all power to u.

The forums are used to discuss the problems the users are doing. If the conflict does not resolve itself, a vote to ban the user is made. This makes it a more democratic system, and lets the community decides what goes. If it's just "three strikes, you're out", bans will appear much more frequently. Not everybody takes the warnings seriously. And besides, we already sort of have this rule. For newbie users, we always warn and tell them the rules or it results in them being banned. Sometimes they obey, sometimes they ignore. If they keep doing these actions, they're banned. The forums are only made for users who have had real experience here. They've been here for a while, and making a sudden ban to them will be a little controversial to our community. That's why we vote on whether or not these people get banned. Take that away, it's just going to make bans more frequent, and things won't quite be decided by the community. 05:00, May 19, 2012 (UTC)

I've thought this over a bit, and my ultimate answer is a firm no. If a user spams and vandalizes the shit out of the wiki, are we going to let them off with warnings? No, we're going to give them a ban. If it's obviously not intentional, then I'd rather have 2 chances, do it once you get a warning, do it again you will be banned. I say don't do this. I&#39;d rather not beat you to death with a slightly heavy silver spoon 20:07, May 19, 2012 (UTC)