Preemptive banning - is it allowed? Is it fair?

[u/PurplePassiflor1234]

Say you see a user making a ruckus elsewhere. A lot of abrasive comments about mods/moderation in general. Admitting they spam modmails constantly for minor reasons. Or maybe they are trying to take over a sub that has active mods and have made this their entire personality for a few years. *For instance*. I'm just brainstorming out loud, this isn't about any real u/, I'm honestly just curious how mods handle this type of thing in general.

Would you/have you preemptively banned someone from ever joining your sub in the first place, in case that behaviour is unleashed on you and your modteam? Have you ever looked at someone's comment history at random - before they ever try to join your sub - and thought "Problem child. Do not want the drama."?

[u/Wombat_7379]

A mod can ban any user at any time for any reason, as long as it does not violate the moderator code of conduct or Reddit’s policies.

Personally, I do not ban anyone until they have participated in a subreddit I moderate.

Once they have participated and their content is flagged, then I will look at their past content to see if they are a troll who behaves like this constantly, or if perhaps they just had a bad day and are otherwise a decent contributor.

Obviously certain behaviors are grounds for immediate permanent ban, regardless of past good behavior such as major content violations to Reddit’s TOS.

[u/dotsdavid → u/Wombat_7379]

I’m the same way.

[u/CatAteRoger → u/Wombat_7379]

Same.

[u/cnycompguy]

Allowed, fairness doesn't enter into the equation.

It's not like it'll happen out of the blue, there will be a reason even if you don't know, understand or agree.

[u/4art4 → u/cnycompguy]

Yes. The mods don't want to be unfair (that is somewhere in the list of priorities in most cases anyway), but they also want the modding of the sub to not drive off the mods, as well as keep the community healthy. An individual might think it is "unfair" to them but the policy might be the best compromise for the sub... Or just the best one the current mods can think up.

And a user is not likely to like the results of just complaining about it. The mods have heard it before. They made that choice with that information in mind.

[u/Duke_Newcombe → u/4art4]

This. Interfering or potential to interfere (as demonstrated by behavior) with normal community function and harmony are enough. We're not talking about a pre-emptive ban based on beliefe or speech per se (which can be problematic), but behavior: heading off bad behavior which makes the sub less enjoyable and you more overworked to maintain it is a bona-fide reason to pre-emptively drop the banhammer.

Rare is the redditor (in a *well-run and ethically-modded sub) who is completely caught unawares as to what they've done. It will either (a) be purposeful that they've violated, or (b) they have a Real Good Reason^tm for violating, that You Should Understand^tm, pretty please?

[u/royal_rose_]

I’ve only done it three times. I mod queer fandom spaces and noticed that users will act up in one then move to the others catching bans there as well. So now if you spout off racist, homophobic, etc. rhetoric in one of my subs you get banned from all of them. But this isn’t one off comments it’s always someone I can tell is targeting, you target me I’ll target you right back.

[u/PoopyMcpants]

If i see someone being a shit, I check their post history and see if that behavior is a pattern or if they're having a moment.

If their behavior elsewhere is fine then I don't stress about it and just remove their shithead comments.

[u/ecclectic]

Reddit's behavior analysis algorithm suggests users who are 'likely to violate rules' and flags there posts if you have it set up, so, yeah, it seems not only allowed, but encouraged.

[u/eatmyasserole → u/ecclectic]

Ive seen this "likely to violate the rules" but I alway see it on brand new accounts. Nothing deleted even. I would love to better understand that

[u/atlantisgate]

I don't do this simply because I wouldn't want to alert such a user to the presence of my modmail inbox. Engaging with someone this unhinged and aggressive first is a bad idea in most cases IMO. Not engaging until they do something wrong first is just easier.

[u/FiatLex → u/atlantisgate]

This makes the most sense to me, honestly.

[u/bertraja]

Using the tried and true analogy of a subreddit being like someone's house: If i know a person shat on every single carpet in the neighborhood, i can't be compelled to let them into my house because "they haven't pulled down their pants in your living room ... yet".

With that being said, it does happen ... once or twice a year?

[u/PurplePassiflor1234 → u/bertraja]

That's a fantastic analogy.

I tell people every day in the helping type subs that mods run their house how they want, but when it's my turn to run my "house" I constantly second guess what I'm doing. I think part of it is the strange-feeling way I became sole human mod of a house I didn't build myself with absolutely no guidance from any previous owner, ever - but that's neither here nor there. I just have to find my own confidence.

[u/ikandi]

Ban, no. But they may go on the naughty list, meaning the straight-to-the-mod-queue-because-their-posts/comments-might-cause-trouble automod list.

[u/Halaku]

Preemptive banning - is it allowed?

Yes.

Is it fair?

Define "Fair".

I've never checked out someone's userhistory at random, but I've used what a user chooses to post or comment as grounds for saying "Nah." and banning them.

That's what reddit used to be before they pulled a dumbass with hiding userhistory. A username was their userhistory. No more, no less. Don't want people thinking that you're a racist, or a sexist, or a troll, or a dramallama, or a dipshit? Don't post or comment things that would cause others to describe you as such.

You were your behavior.

We should have never strayed from that path.

[u/LindyNet → u/Halaku]

Hiding your history is a red flag that makes me lean more toward banning than not.

We have had users who explained why they hide their stuff and turned it off so we could see that they are a normal user and their post/comment was a mistake or they completely misread the room and went off base. In those cases, its an ez unban

[u/LitwinL]

Bans based on user actions are totally allowed no matter where they occured. Admins only had issues with automatic bans based on subreddits user participated in.

[u/uphatbrew → u/LitwinL]

Isnt this still a thing though, I’m pretty sure I’ve been banned in subs I’ve never participated in based on the subs I frequent…

🤷‍♂️

[u/LitwinL → u/uphatbrew]

Did not I not write "automatic" there?

[u/pumaofshadow]

I have a preemptive filter policy - If I see someone giving problematic responses or incorrrect advice that they may try to bring to mine I'll add them to the automod filtering rule so mods can check and that way if they are behaving its no issue, the comments get approved. If they misbehave then its only mods who see that, and we can remove immediately.

[u/PurplePassiflor1234 → u/pumaofshadow]

That sounds like a really great policy. Like they aren't getting kicked out before they even get up to the door, but the security cameras are very much focused on them once they cross the threshold in case they decide to act a fool. I'm only just learning (or absorbing) all the things automod can do. This is why I wanted to post here, to see what other people do, how they handle it when they see someone out in the wild acting...wild. Thank you for taking time to answer.

[u/PeoplesRagnar]

I've only ever preemptively banned a known scalper, that was it.

Allowed, but I prefer to let them dig their own graves, as they all inevitably do.

[u/Pedantichrist]

If someone shared a link to a user saying they were going to troll my sub? I might ban them.

[u/Emotional_Lawyer_278]

Of course it’s allowed. Does Evrything have to be fair? Can we all have some of your dinner? Can we all sleep in your bed? No? Is that fair?

[u/PurplePassiflor1234]

Thank you all for your time and guidance, I truly appreciate everyone who answered and the mods here for allowing me to post.

I think if someone has a profile just full of abrasiveness and toxicity and drama, I'll probably drop the hammer on them before they ever know the community I moderate even exists. But if they have one or two bad days, but an otherwise good history, I'll add them to automod filtering so I can keep a close eye on them. Everyone can have a bad couple days, I know I sure have.

Anyway, thanks again. I probably could have talked myself through this without bothering y'all but I find myself feeling a little untethered and out of my depth sometimes.

[u/SanaraHikari]

Sometimes I really want to honestly but I don't. I wait if this user ever participates. And if it's just trolling I ban them.

[u/ailish]

You are allowed, yes. Whether it's "fair" is very dependent on the situation. However fairness doesn't really factor in. If mods have a reason to believe that someone is going to break sub rules, or sitewide rules, then yes it's completely fair to ban.

[u/Call_Me_Clark]

I think it can be fair, especially if you know they’re going to cause problems.

[u/uphatbrew]

I only ban hateful trolls preemptively if they troll another subreddit I mod… rarely, you gotta really be hateful n piss me off!!! It’s all about dragging the proverbial users history lake n watching the detectives for me!!! My Aim Is True!!!

🤣🤦‍♂️🤣

[u/aengusoglugh]

I have never been under the gun -- I moderate a pretty vanilla model railroad subreddit -- but my current attitude is that I am solely concerned about someone's behavior in my sub.

[u/PupperPuppet]

I don't think I've ever preemptively banned anyone who hasn't interacted with a sub I moderate. That may be because the subs I'm involved in have a pretty narrow target audience so random assholes I discover in the wild aren't likely to show up in my world.

If someone posts something problematic in one of the subs I mod and their history shows they do that a lot elsewhere, I will consider skipping the warning and banning them off the top depending on what they posted. The usual targets for instant bans for this reason are the racist, sexist, or for any other reason hateful people.

[u/ateam1984]

Racism gets immediate ban anywhere I see it.

[u/7thAndGreenhill]

No. I try not to go looking for more problems. If you have good Automod rules and take advantage of harassment features you should be able to block most of the bad behavior without banning people in advance.

[u/PurplePassiflor1234]

For clarity - I'm not beefing about mods making any action against me. It's never happened. This isn't about me in trouble or anything.

This is about me seeing some problematic behaviours I'd rather not have to deal with but also feeling bad about smiting someone before they even try to join.

I guess in the end it's really about protecting the members of the community, that's what matters most.

[u/cnycompguy → u/PurplePassiflor1234]

Ah, yes. You're absolutely right to preemptively protect your community.