I just noticed a user who has apparently been penalty-boxed until April 27, 2019. The notification over his/her profile reads:

This account is temporarily suspended to cool down. The suspension period ends on Apr 27 '19 at 8:17.

Is that correct, or a bug?

I found a similar question about a user boxed to "cool down" for a long period, though not as long as this: What could cause users to be placed in the penalty box for an entire year?

The answer on that post lists one possible reason for arbitrarily long suspensions as:

When the user is underage (you must be at least 13 years old to use sites in the SE network).

Assuming that means a suspension until you're old enough, that's probably not the case here since it would mean this user just turned seven years old (and joined SO when they were five).

Another possible reason listed there:

When it is apparent that the user has made no attempt whatsoever to find out what the site is about and how to be a good citizen of the site, and it is clear that the user is unlikely to reform (i.e. spammers and low quality contributors).

Could this be an explanation, then - that the decision was made that this user wasn't going to change and so was effectively suspended indefinitely?

I can link to the user if necessary, but wanted to avoid any Streisanding.

EDIT: Just to clarify, I'm not interested in the gory details of this particular user (part of the reason I didn't link there). The question is about whether that far-flung date is correct, and if so what the general explanation for that long of a suspension would be.

  • 2
    Certain individuals 'worked overtime' to earn themselves, as it were, transportation to the New World. The expression 'he who shall not be named' springs to mind. – Rosinante Jun 3 '12 at 22:05
  • 1
    Other were determined to be (or to be representing themselves as) younger than the age limit in the terms of service (which are driven by US internet privacy laws). – dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten Jun 3 '12 at 22:07
  • 2
    I'm interested in what these downvotes mean. Should I have known that such long suspensions were possible? Is the subject taboo? – Paul Bellora Jun 3 '12 at 22:32
  • 6
    The subject isn't taboo as such, but it could be that Meta users are tired of talking about whoever was hit with that suspension (I assume it's either a Chet, a Rich, or an Evan). No reason not to ask though – Pekka Jun 3 '12 at 23:17
  • 1
    Yeah, it's come up quite a bit before, and the reason seems fairly obvious if you knew we don't have (or really need) a lifetime ban . – Ben Brocka Jun 3 '12 at 23:59

Could this be an explanation, then - that the decision was made that this user wasn't going to change and so was effectively suspended indefinitely?

It's likely a safe bet.

Really long suspension times are reserved for especially egregious abuses. I don't really want to offer specific examples lest they be construed as one of the reasons the user in question was suspended for.

In general, we do not discuss why specific users are suspended. That's between them and us. If a user leaves their contact information in their profile, feel free to contact them directly and ask.

| improve this answer | |
  • Thanks for clarifying - I'm not trying to dig up any details, but was interested in the general explanation. – Paul Bellora Jun 3 '12 at 22:22
  • 2
    More likely repeated abuse, even after warnings and shorter periods of suspension. In this specific case quick look in his activity showed he was in an edit rampage, bumping his answers with meaningless edits just to gain more reputation. – Shadow Wizard Wearing Mask Jun 4 '12 at 8:29
  • @ShaWizDowArd: But wouldn't that be counterproductive by turning them into CW after a while? – Mechanical snail Aug 8 '12 at 5:04
  • @Mechanicalsnail 12 edits.. that's a long while. – Shadow Wizard Wearing Mask Aug 8 '12 at 6:30

Adam Lear’s answer is correct, but there is one other possible (and in a way, more innocent) reason for extremely long suspensions: The Super User moderators at some point started to merge all spam accounts into a single user (this has several interesting implications for spamfighting) instead of outright deleting them. The target user, into which 487 users have been merged to this date, is currently suspended until 2025. There’s obviously no reason to ever have this “user” not be suspended.

I don't know if other site moderators have started doing this as well.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    Funny, the target user is linked to an "active" SO account. He must have been a spammer on SU. – Jeff Mercado Jun 4 '12 at 7:41
  • Hmm.. got me thinking. Is there a chance several moderators gave one year suspension and it "stacked" to 7 years? Can happen when there are several different flags, each handled by a different moderator what do you think? – Shadow Wizard Wearing Mask Jun 4 '12 at 8:33
  • @ShaDowWizArd Any particular reason you felt the need to link to the exact account, when everyone was careful to point out that there's absolutely no way specifics will be discussed? Also suspensions don't stack up, I suspended a user on ProgSE seconds after a fellow mod had already suspended them, and the suspension period was unaffected. – yannis Jun 4 '12 at 9:26
  • @Yannis didn't understand people were avoiding from posting it - this is now fixed. I still wonder though, how come 7 years - I was under the impression one year is considered the maximum and if after such period in suspension the user still didn't learn the lesson then even longer period is placed. – Shadow Wizard Wearing Mask Jun 4 '12 at 10:01
  • 2
    @ShaDowWizArd The actual maximum is about 13 years (or maybe 26... I can't recall if it's 5000 days or 9999). Multi-year suspensions are usually our way of saying someone's not welcome to return regardless of their intentions to improve. – Adam Lear Jun 4 '12 at 14:56
  • 1
    @Anna fair enough, but still - the official blog post says your account will be placed in timed suspension for anywhere from 1 to 365 days so doesn't it need to be changed? – Shadow Wizard Wearing Mask Jun 4 '12 at 20:25
  • 1
    @ShaDowWizArd I personally don't think it's a huge deal. This isn't something set in stone... and "anywhere from 1 to 5000" days would look silly. – Adam Lear Jun 4 '12 at 20:29
  • 1
    @AnnaLear: "About 13 years (or maybe 26)." Basically a whole generation. By that time, there would likely be a whole new set of technologies, and maybe a new technological "ethos." – Tom Au Sep 29 '13 at 19:12
  • 1
    @TomAu This is a moot point now. The max suspension length available to moderators now is 365 days. – Adam Lear Sep 29 '13 at 21:51
  • 1
    Out of curiosity, what's the advantage of merging spam accounts into one user? (And keeping it alive?) // To the point: why suspend someone for 7 years rather than indefinitely / forever? – Cerberus_Reinstate-Monica Oct 22 '18 at 17:50

You must log in to answer this question.

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