Yes, they suck.
27% (4 votes)
No, ever heard of freedom of speech?
13% (2 votes)
Keep them for the Lolz
20% (3 votes)
They waste time and energy, don't ban, just stab them between the eyes and gouge their brains out with a cute little mini spade.
7% (1 vote)
Something else
13% (2 votes)
This is not going to be a jaffa cakes option.
20% (3 votes)
Total votes: 15
It's a hard choice. I like the sound of number 4
Seriously, either 1 or 3
"How many people find fault in what they're reading and the fault is in their own understanding" Al Mutanabbi
So they should either be banned or kept?
You've pretty much covered all bases there haven't you
#Before you look at the thorns of the rose , look at it's beauty. Before you complain about the heat of the sun , enjoy it's light. Before you complain about the blackness of the night, think of it's peace and quiet... #
Why?
Just curious. The policy atm seems to be that they're fine to stay until they really bother either 'You' or Ed, and I wanted to know what everyone else thought.
#Before you look at the thorns of the rose , look at it's beauty. Before you complain about the heat of the sun , enjoy it's light. Before you complain about the blackness of the night, think of it's peace and quiet... #
Lol. Well it depends how idiotic/annoying/sectarian they are.
You need a way to measure the levels, e.g if they insult Islam or a person really badly (like what lolswood said to malik) then first time they should get warnings, if it continues then be banned for a while.
Sometimes its amusing and banning would be extreme.
"How many people find fault in what they're reading and the fault is in their own understanding" Al Mutanabbi
I think that the policy should be refined:
"they're fine to stay until they really bother either 'You'."
but then again I have shown great tolerance towards Lollywood and Metallica in general...
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
great tolerance indeed.
i think it should be a case by case thing. and not if they "bother" a certain person, but mroe if they insult someone or Islam....bbbbbbbbuuuuuuuuuuuut. they DO make revvy interesting and are really good revision tools. not tools. revision..euh..thingies.. euh...
Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary?
2 or 3.
revision?
"How many people find fault in what they're reading and the fault is in their own understanding" Al Mutanabbi
religious knowledge.
Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary?
I went for a fifth option of "Something else", I mean who defines annoying? If someone is dangerously secetarian or wants to stir up hatred and trouble rather than a mature debate, then it might be better to warn them first.
I think banning should be left for the most extreme cases.
“Before death takes away what you are given, give away whatever there is to give.”
Mawlana Jalal ud Din Rumi