Community

Your link points to the root of the thread.

Were you perhaps intending a subordinate post?

That's odd that it only takes you to the root, as it takes me to post 31 of 34. Anyway, here is the appropriate part of the post, by a TR employee:

3) We limit the number of open questions you can have at one time. Have too many open, unrated questions? Well, you can't start another one until you've closed an old one. Close an old one without rating/responding, and your meter will suffer.

4) We surface questions on your signature. That little box with your rating meter that follows you around? We add a "Help this user" link that takes you to that person's open questions. If somebody helps you, you now have a quick and easy way of returning the favor. We may even give extra meter bumps to people who answers questions through this link path.

...

My apologies. After getting a good night's sleep, I reread the posts. Although they are on the same topic, i.e., dealing with Q&A abusers, the suggestions/implementations are not the same. Hopefully, we can make your suggested interim approach work or TR can actually come up with a solution.

That is, getting someone off the blacklist, without needing the intervention of the member who initiated the bar?

Perhaps TR could un-blacklist those who go back to rate a suitable percentage of answers, after making the blacklisted person wait perhaps 30 days. Suggestions?

We're seeking an interim procedure that can be self-administered by the members alone.

So. . . you have a single discussion titled something like "Q&A Offenders," where primary posts list the offender, and secondary posts provide additional detail from others. When someone wants to expunge someone, they create another primary post with the word "Expunge" preceeding the ID of the previously banished. By having the expungement line up at the same hierarchical level as the original banishment, it would be easier to see and take the appropriate action -- either consider that person expunged OR reply with adverse information or additional commentary for expungement.

Well obviously if ONE person posts and says HEY, WATCH OUT FOR THIS GUY. Then ten other people say YEAH, LOOK AT THIS TOO! THen one must use his OWN judgement when deciding to help the person, it doesn't mean nobody is GOING to help or that the person is banished from TR.

So if later on four or five people start saying YEAH BUT HE DOESN'T DO IT NOW or HE WAS FAIR WITH ME, then again the person can make a decision whether or not they help the guy or not, again he wouldn't be BANISHED or DISQUALIFIED, but regulars that know of a flagged alias can choose to help others instead, IF THEY CHOOSE.

We aren't suggesting policing it but flagging or giving a heads up on someone's negative activity.

Pretty straight forward and simple really.

1) Ask that all those making the Primary post blacklisting someone accept Peer-to-Peer messages, so that they can be asked to alter their original post accordingly. Obviously, since this will require voluntary co-operation, it cannot be relied upon in all cases.

2) Establishing a specific Fixed Description for Secondary posts which can be used to view the current consensus re. the member in question. With this, in the event that the original postor is either unreachable or declines to rescind their banishment order, we will have an alternative method for rehabilitating a member's standing.