Thread:Disturbedfan1100/@comment-25802715-20150723022626/@comment-6812733-20150723032348

1. No arguments here, I agree with you that it'd be better to have a confidential way would be better. But as you said in the last sentence of your message that you can't think of any alternatives, neither could I. But having one way that works somehow is better than having no ways at all.

2. The evidence that I referred to was the explanation for the bans which exists in the contributions page. There everyone can see the reason for the ban and thus, be able to further seek out a better explanation. If one is found it is like you said "oh okay"-reaction. But if it's not, people might start accusing that there was not a real valid reason for the ban, show the evidence in full scale etc. Also showing the evidence without public demand builds trust between the admins/chatmods and the remaining users, a problem that is far too visible in our wiki where admins and chatmods are quite easily attacked for their decisions (though the situation has been calming down these last few months). The users here are quite docile and I see no threat from showing evidence to the public. Yes they might comment something but if the evidence is documented in a manner that makes it hard to fake, there seems (to me) to be no threat as of this time. Besides, as this conversation is visible to the public, how would everyone react when suddenly they'd start losing the evidence provided by admins without asking? That, to me, seems to be a much higher risk than showing the evidence by our own accord.

3. This point is one of those things that has kept me wondering about leaving mapping community all together. There's not a place where we all (read: admins and chatmods) can talk about these things together in an organised fashion. The closest thing is Skype, in which I am not part of and never will be, thus making it near impossible for me to try and keep up with other admins and chatmods. I've been trying to create a common ground here in the wiki but it usually gets ignored.

4. Like I said in my previous reply, sometimes admins/chatmods do not insert any reason at all for the ban and just roll with the automated reason that the Wikia offers. Yes, they can go and edit it but I do not see each admin and chatmod visiting every active users contribution page every day, just to see if there's a reason for a previous ban that had the automated message. This is, once again, why I consider the "ban thread" to be a good idea. No reason might be put into the ban itself but it could be later on (preferably within 48 hours) explained in the thread without having to try to change it in the contributions page or when the ban is already over.

You raise a valid point with people who bump old threads/blogs with spam and do not contribute in anyway whatsoever. But many forums/wikis/websites have a policy on "necroing" pages. Usually when people comment on an old, inactive page/blog/thread, it is a punishable act, a policy which I think is needed in the wiki if the people do not start acting accordingly. Spam is spam, it can always be dealt as such, AKA deleting it, the users should know this by now.