Lock them

[Champ]

Marburg, I can't really say anything other than I love your post. I think I'll bookmark it incase I find myself needing to review my behaviour or thoughts.

Very correct/smart btw to make this.
2-3 mounth ago I had a discussion abou one thing with 3 players on forum. Then came one ''good'' person named [REDACTED] and flooded all with pictures.
Some people sayed that this was fun. Question: Why this funny? I had discussion with people and our discussion was trolled, topic locked. Just WTF? I understand that it was in Flood section, but at least can you respect other? [REDACTED] was not sanctionied because of flood of cource, and I was not completed my discussion. Where is justice here? Nowhere... No justice on Disco...
Edit: oh, btw... Forgot about [REDACTED]... she is not sanctionied too because of words: ''You must die'' to player in General Discussion topic

This brings to mind another issue. Legitimate discussions in Flood. They will be destroyed by flooders, and were once upon a time being locked. Take your legitimate discussions out of flood, then they can be moderated (and spammers reported) for off-topic or trolling.

Ouch

It's okay Garrett, we still love you <3 Dun forget you're an admin now too, so it doesn't count.

Additionally I find it relevant to bring up that thousands upon thousands of posts or threads (but specifically posts) that take it way over the line are invis'd. This work is being done. Spammy posts that take it too far are removed.

This leads me onto the concept of how to define trolling or spamming otherwise. Firstly, good luck to you sir, because it's just soooooo easy to do that. Sarcasm, for example (see earlier) can in certain usages, and in others not be thought of as trolling. I think repeated posts of a nature akin to that could be pushing it towards the boundary and even into the former consideration. As in it would be trolling.

Marburg's right too, if someone is seriously misbehaving in a thread, PM a mod. But I'd say treat this (almost) like a sanction. Use the sandwich rule.

If your topic was locked not on the basis of the original content, but on the spam that it ended in, and it was not in flood, I would personally recommend PMing a mod, once, politely to ask if you could in one way or another continue the conversation in the original thread or elsewhere.

While I do think the idea of reporting and tempbans that follow being appropriate action, I think the mechanic of locking someone from posting in a thread for their behaviour should be investigated.
I am however concerned about the inevitable locking of people's QQ or raeg, and as a result feeling vindicated or otherwise, leading to more QQ, raeg, or conspiracy theorists. Same thing already happens with invis sometimes, but locking would have a more profound effect, I'd think.

Makc, this is the internet. People post what they do, for one reason or another. Normally they think they're being funny in your example*. And personally I'm not aware of anyone being post-counter modified, apart from the effects of invisibling and what not. I feel like a post counter change, while it might hurt some people egotistically, should not be implemented and instead tempbans, longer bans or permabans used accordingly.

Sorry for the wall of text everyone. Lot of ideas to discuss. Edit: According to animal testing, it also doesn't take long to read.

* Upon said re-read, this sounded like a personal attack. The example I refer to is that which Makc provided himself.

---