Are there different action to make an account disabilitation instead of a ban?
I mean, sometimes users ask to cancel their registrations to the community because they're not interested anymore.
Do you suggest to use the ban procedure or there's some other thing to do to differentiate banning from disabling on request?
Solved! Go to Solution.
I don't see the need to differentiate between a ban and disabling a user apart from the mod recording the why in admin notes. It is effectively the same thing @salvatorelab. You don't have to make the reason public - most community managers will suggest you keep such information private.
We do the same, @DanK. Users who are very insistent, we agree to ban but we stress this does not remove contributions, nor will we do so as once posted, that content belongs to us.
@Kim_E A little off this topic, but I wanted to mention, when you mark a user's posts as spam, you're teaching Spam Quarantine that those types of posts are spam, not normal posts. Since it learns as it goes, the more normal posts that are marked as spam, the more of a chance you'll start seeing other user's normal posts caught up in quarantine.
A better option after banning a user might be to just remove all their posts (using batch processing if available), or allowing their posts to remain in the community to keep from disrupting the flow of conversation.
I agree with KathyH on not using the "Mark All Content As Spam" option to remove legitimate content. Her explanation about how the spam mitigation tool learns and the ramifications is spot-on.
On the communities I have experience with, the rule has always been to leave the content in place to avoid disrupting the continuity of any given discussion.
Community Coordinator, Strategic Services
@JasonHill I'm on the fence about this. Some people get banned and other people choose to leave. Certainly there is a public explanation and a private explanation and that might differ.
On my community it would be helpful to provide a public reason on the profile when someone has chosen to leave so that their avatar goes gray so people know not to expect a reply from that person. Additionally it would help to inform others that the person has chosen to leave or they've been banned for breaking the rules. We have conspiracy theories otherwise that we're trying to remove people when they simply have chosen to leave on their own.
We don't allow people to close their own account because sometimes people choose to come back and by allowing them to close their account they will anonymize their data and then they might have remorse and want it to be associated again.
I'm trying to find out if there is an outbound email that goes out when you ban someone or if it only blocks them from doing something when they login or boots them if they are currently logged in.
Welcome to the Technology board!Curious about our platform? Looking to connect on social technology? You've come to the right place!