21

muru is one of the best users here, like Braiam and many other good folks. Out of curiosity, may I know why his account is suspended? He is a good guy. I just found out about his suspension by seeing he only has 1 reputation. I can't imagine what a veteran and nice man like him could do to deserve suspension.

  • 6
    Only mods know reason behind suspension but they aren't supposed to talk about such internal things, I guess. So, that's a secret. – Kulfy Jan 30 at 19:55
  • 3
    muru knows as well, but I doubt he wants to talk about it. – dessert Jan 30 at 20:53
  • 14
    FYI guys, it is policy to not share details on suspensions. Especially when it's network-wide suspensions. Keep in mind that asking about specifics of suspensions is usually not going to get you an answer. (Oli's response is an exception to this rule, however this point still stands and shall stand for eternity) – Thomas Ward Jan 31 at 14:51
  • 5
    I'm certain Monica's compliant there is about a completely different incident. See: interpersonal.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3330/… – Oli Jan 31 at 21:21
  • 3
    @Lynob which post of Monica's are you referring to? I know for a fact that she was not involved in the suspension you are asking about and she doesn't know anything about it, so I know that she couldn't have written about it on her blog. But what post is it you are thinking about? If it's this one, then I can assure you it is about something completely different which has nothing to do with AU or any user here. – terdon Feb 2 at 11:17
  • @terdon I take my comments back then :) – Lynob Feb 2 at 11:30
  • 1
    @Dɑvïd Edited, thanks for the FYI. – Thomas Ward Feb 27 at 16:02
30

This puts me in a strange position. Stepping through the incident might be a teachable moment but without their input —which they cannot currently give, for obvious reasons— it seems unfair to drag a defenceless user back through this. I also can't just delete this because censorship (sheeple!) so I'm left here giving you the vaguest confirmation.

  • Yes, they earned a network wide suspension for activities on this site.
  • It wasn't a mistake or an overreaction by a grumpy moderator.
  • It wasn't an action that was taken lightly, at all, or without serious discussion.
  • They will be thoroughly welcome back after their suspension is over.

It's horrible having to discipline a user you respect, even a user who is a massive net good for the site, but we can't give established users significantly more leeway than newer users. That wouldn't be fair. We uphold the rules as best we can, across the board. Indeed, "veterans" know better than most where the boundaries lie.

So I dispute in the strongest terms that this was a betrayal of any sort.
A suspension was the only option that would have been fair to other users.

Again, I'm not trying to drag muru through the mud. What's done is done. They are welcome back come the end of their suspension, as we have welcomed many other users back at the end of theirs. I can't speak to others' feelings other than to say I think our actions were consistent with site rules, they should not feel betrayed.

  • 2
    I respect you as much as I respect him, the old guards, therefore I'll leave it at that, I know that it was for activities on this site, I read a strange tweet on his twitter, and we all know he won't be coming back, I mean if if it was me, it would have felt like a betrayal after what? a decade? When you hurt a veteran you can't expect him back, we all know that. – Lynob Jan 30 at 22:37
  • 7
    We all make mistakes, veterans or not. I think that much was accepted by all at the time. I really cannot speak to what somebody else will do in two months time but from my perspective, there is no reason not to move on. – Oli Jan 30 at 23:12
  • 3
    I wasn't involved in this particular decision, but I had a couple of run-ins with him early on, and had to ask him to stop at least once (which he did). So I wasn't particularly surprised. However, I respect his knowledge and the considerable effort he put in and I understand everybody has their bad days. We're all emotional creatures and we all need to know where the line is and the consequences of stepping over that need to be universal and considered. Don't forget here that SO and us lost from this decision also. Noone wins right now, but hopefully we all end up better off. – tudor Feb 6 at 23:40
  • 1
    Speaking from my own experience, rest is an important thing, and sometimes forced rest is the only way to get someone to reflect on how they might handle things a bit better next time. That goes for us, too. :-) – tudor Feb 6 at 23:45
  • muru is quite capable of speaking, trust me. This user is choosing not to. I can live with that. – Joshua Feb 7 at 4:03
  • 1
    @Joshua They are unable to post while suspended, that is what Oli is referring to here when he says they cannot give their input. – Seth Feb 16 at 20:29
8

I could but won't make observations on specific user's conduct I've noticed myself. FWIW I've never lodged a complaint.

I will say that I received a 30 minute suspension in Ask Ubuntu General Chat Room which was good for me:

  • It made me reflect on the feelings of others.
  • The world can be politically biased to left and right extremes so jokes about politicians and mainstream media should be avoided.

After the 30 minute suspension ended I didn't hang out in the room as much as before. Perhaps only 1 to 5% as much?

Suspension taught me a lesson which it is designed to do. It doesn't matter how brilliant a person is here. Brilliance alone doesn't make one a shining star in diplomatic tact.

  • 2
    That's interesting. We have Oli saying he was "Stepping through the incident", and here they don't provide you with a reason at all? I understand that not providing a specific reason reduces the possible retaliatory responses, but surely a generic reason (i.e. which policy or rule) should be supplied as part of the act of suspension purely so that the person can know roughly what to avoid in future! – tudor Feb 12 at 3:40
  • @tudor In General Chat Room there used to be many of us gathering most nights and chatting about everything under the sun. Since my suspension I've noticed the atmosphere has changed and not many people drop by like before. Perhaps others became scared by my suspension? Anyway it's just a general chatroom and not missing much. – WinEunuuchs2Unix Feb 13 at 0:18
  • There's always a linchpin in any group. ;-) – tudor Feb 13 at 0:21
  • 2
    The user is always offered an explanation for a suspension. I'll be honest I'm a bit suspicious when you say that you were never told why, but I suppose it's possible. I can't recall this incident off the top of my head but I'm more than willing to look it up if you want. – Seth Feb 16 at 20:31
  • 2
    Actually, looking into it, you've never been suspended in chat for 30 days, nor on the main site. So I really have no idea what you're referring to here. – Seth Feb 16 at 20:33
  • @Seth I wasn't suspended from chat as I could setup chatrooms during that period. Just the Ask Ubuntu General Chatroom. ParanoidPanda posted comments about it but I can't remember where or when. – WinEunuuchs2Unix Feb 16 at 20:58
  • 1
    @WinEunuuchs2Unix That's not how chat suspensions work. You're either banned from all of chat or you're not banned at all. It's possible you were kicked, whereupon you would be temp banned from one room for 30 seconds to 5 minutes (it increases per kick), but that's it. – Seth Feb 17 at 18:35
  • @Seth I really can't explain what happened then. I would call out Paranoid Panada for more information but I can't find his user ID in search. The main tenants stand though: I was banned (or thought I was) for 30 days and this led me to review my conduct in General Chat room and avoid mainstream news debates. – WinEunuuchs2Unix Feb 18 at 23:02
  • 4
    Moderators do not go around suspending people without explanation! You have been suspended from chat two times, both of them for only 30 minutes. Also, both of these suspensions were automatic: people flagged something you said as offensive and the flag was validated by one of the hundreds of mods on the SE network (chat flags go to everyone) which causes an automatic suspension of 30 minutes. I don't know why you thought it was for 30 days. But please edit your question and remove the pretty serious accusation you've made. We did not give you a 30-day suspension with no explanation! – terdon Feb 19 at 8:42
  • @terdon I changed 30 days to 30 minutes.I probably read the screen to quickly when the suspension occured. Thanks for looking into history. – WinEunuuchs2Unix Feb 19 at 11:22
  • 1
    And thank you for clearing our name! :) – terdon Feb 19 at 11:22
  • 1
    @tudor please see updated answer. Mods always give a reason for suspension. In this case, the chat suspension that Win is remembering was automatically applied by the system because a comment was flagged in chat. So that wasn't a mod-issued suspension and that's why there was no explanation. When a user is suspended from a site by a moderator, there is always an email sent explaining why that happened. – terdon Feb 19 at 12:17
  • @terdon, thanks for the explanation. I think this is evidence that there needs to be greater transparency in the policies, however. WinEunuuchs2Unix clearly believed it was a 30-day suspension without explanation and the fact that he accepted that is a pretty significant lack of confidence in the system, IMHO. – tudor Feb 19 at 23:35
  • 1
    @tudor I have no idea how or why Win would have thought so. All he had to do was ask one of us or even just try and chat to see it wasn't the case. I don't see how the fact that one user made a mistake is evidence of anything at all. It was just a misunderstanding. And, I stress, mods always explain when giving site suspensions. It isn't even possible to suspend (from the site, not chat) without contacting the user. The UI doesn't allow it. – terdon Feb 19 at 23:41
  • 1
    Finally, @tudor, the policies are very clear. When you see a case like this, where a user has been suspended by SE staff (only they can suspend network-wide) you can assume the user broke the rules in a very clear and flagrant way. And you can also assume the user has been told exactly why. This isn't something that can happen by accident, this is the nuclear option. – terdon Feb 19 at 23:44

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .