12

As things are now, site suspensions for a user's parent site result in chat suspensions. It works fine, unless of course, a malcontent has a different site as his parent and pops over to troll you. It's happened a few times, and while we can usually deal with it, it seems odd that in theory a user could pick whether he gets chat-banned or not by choice of his parent site for chat.

It feels like a suspension is a clear sign that one needs a bit of time to cool down, and isn't really ready to play nice. Could we have a suspension anywhere on the network result in a corresponding, network-wide chat ban?

  • 1
    Network wide you mean suspend from MSE and SO chat too? I don't think it's good idea. – Shadow The Curly Braced Wizard Apr 30 '17 at 14:44
  • 1
    Of course the counter argument to this is that you are stopping a user participating in chat rooms linked to sites where they are not suspended. – ChrisF Apr 30 '17 at 14:45
  • 2
    I was thinking SE chat primarily - there's other means of appealing a suspension anyway. – Journeyman Geek Apr 30 '17 at 14:45
  • 7
    @ChrisF to which the counter-counter-argument is that if you don't do this, they can still participate in chat rooms linked to the site where they are suspended. – ArtOfCode Apr 30 '17 at 14:46
  • 3
    @ArtOfCode - indeed. It's a real problem, but the ramifications of possible solutions need to be discussed. It could well be that "we" decide that preventing a user chatting is necessary. – ChrisF Apr 30 '17 at 14:47
  • 1
    eh, I think this should remain a case-by-case basis. If someone is being bad enough in an SO chat room that they warrant being suspended network-wide, ban them network-wide... not all cases of being suspended are that serious. – Kevin B Oct 31 '18 at 19:10
16

Of course the counter argument to this is that you are stopping a user participating in chat rooms linked to sites where they are not suspended. – ChrisF

To which the counter-counter-argument is that if you don't do this, they can still participate in chat rooms linked to the site where they are suspended. – ArtOfCode

Proposal: Cause site suspensions to stop a user participating in chat rooms linked to sites where they are suspended, but require a chat ban to stop a user from participating in chat rooms linked to sites where they are not suspended.

  • 1
    ... or in chat rooms that are not linked to any site. – iBug Oct 31 '18 at 4:56
  • @ɪʙᴜɢ I mean, technically that's already covered (not linked to any site< not linked to that site) but it's a good edge-case. – wizzwizz4 Oct 31 '18 at 7:02
-5

It would ban the chat activity for the users having and using many SE sites. If somebody is suspended on, for example, the SU, it shouldn't mean that he can't chat on a SO channel. It would punish them on a field which is unrelated to their crimes.

The SE (company) seems trying to separate the SE sites as they can (which can be a reason of their dislike of the question migrations). Giving the mods more cross-site privileges would be another step against this concept, thus I think this suggestion has only a little chance to be implemented.

Mods can already give chat suspensions, too, in my opinion it is already questionable, why should they be able to affect unrelated sites.

  • 2
    That's kinda the point. And this has nothing to do with question migrations at all. – Journeyman Geek May 1 '17 at 2:20
  • @JourneymanGeek Thanks. The indirect relation between them is that both is about the seemingly existing SE concept that they try to separate their sites as they can. – peterh May 23 '17 at 18:03

You must log in to answer this question.

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