2

There are some users which have an outstanding track-records:

enter image description here

In the case of the picture above the user's account is actually suspended.

The same way users over 2000 rep get the rel="nofollow" removed, on the other side, in my opinion, suspended accounts should have linking privileges suspended.

If the community explicitly doesn't trust him or is penalizing the user, hes links cound be harmful and should not be reachable.

IMO this includes "website:" and the "About Me:"

(Though the last is a stronger measure) I think they should be hidden (censored) and shown again if the suspension ended.

What do you think about this?

Improve this question
2
  • 1
    Perhaps edit your answer to not single Evan out? – Tim Post Jan 24 '11 at 20:51
  • Additionally, as their reputation drops to 1, the nofollow tag is used (I believe) throughout the period of their suspension. – Tim Post Jan 24 '11 at 20:54
4

Suspensions aren't done because the user is a bad person. Suspensions are done because of problematic actions that have accrued. It's not a matter of explicit distrust, more that it's just a temporary punishment.

So unless those actions are related to bad linking practices, there's no reason to penalize the linking behavior of the user. This would be similar to saying the answers of a suspended user could be harmful and should be deleted for the duration of the suspension. It's just accessory that would do nothing to actually help the site.

As an example of a scenario where the actions would relate, if it was a spammer that was suspended due to excessive spam activity, then maybe the user's website could be removed if it links to the same spam content that all of the offending activity belonged to.

Improve this answer
7
  • I see your point, and I think it's a good one, but answering is a less "dangerous" act thank linking and the best control method for this last is voting. A very wrong answer will very probably be heavily downvoted by the community, a bad link will have no warning, no community involvement. – Trufa Jan 24 '11 at 20:50
  • Can a suspended user even modify their profile / previous answers? – Tim Post Jan 24 '11 at 20:50
  • @Trufa If the user has a bad link in their profile, it probably should have been brought up before the suspension or alongside it. But unless it's explicitly called out, there's no reason to disable. Suspension isn't meant to label users as if they were common criminals or thugs. So if a user happens to be suspended, that says absolutely nothing about the safety of their links unless the suspension had anything to do with the safety of their links. – Grace Note♦ Jan 24 '11 at 20:52
  • @Tim I know they can't modify their own answers. But I don't know if they can touch their profile. My guess is that they can't, though. Moderators can, though. – Grace Note♦ Jan 24 '11 at 20:55
  • A suspended account is one of the harshest ways the community has of penalizing, I don't see how censoring the linking is more violent that suspending an account, all the information will be restored once the profile is restored. – Trufa Jan 24 '11 at 20:57
  • @Trufa It's not more violent, but it is exceptionally unnecessary and excessive. Suspension means "this user did something wrong". It does not on its own merits mean "this user is bad and should not be trusted". – Grace Note♦ Jan 24 '11 at 21:03
  • I don't particularly agree with the concept of suspension but, I see that the measure might be overly aggressive, thanks of the answer. – Trufa Jan 25 '11 at 12:14
1

One is suspended when it is determined that

  1. Their past behavior is destructive rather than constructive (and/or they end up personally causing more admin work than they should)
  2. They do not express an interest in, or desire to change

Suspension simply reconciles the fact that we can't allow 1 to continue to occur as long as 2 remains true.

Unless the links, specifically, cause problems then there is no reason to address them specifically.

Suspension is not meant to be a punishment, so much as saying, "go away kid, ya bother me." Or, in other words, the suspension is the solution to a problem. Nothing more, nothing less.

If they choose to continue their behavior after suspension, they will be suspended again - not because we hate them, or we want to hurt them, but because we can't hire someone to vet all their actions 24/7.

If someone's links present a problem, email the team, or flag one of their posts and notify the moderator. Otherwise there's no reason to make it a normal part of suspension.

Keep in mind that many of those users that have been suspended have made great contributions to the sites, and deserve the recognition they get, little as it may be.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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