To view the thread on which Ogrim originally posted his comment, click here.

 

Be humane, be open, be ethical, be credible, be forgiving, be safe. These are the guidelines established by Western's Viking Village forum when it first started on Oct. 6, 2008.

The forum is an online discussion several members of Western's library staff, Academic Technology and User Services and other faculty and staff set up to create an “informal learning space” for students, said Andrea Peterson, the advisor for the forum.

The guidelines are there to help users determine what constitutes an appropriate post, Peterson said.  One user—“Ogrim” or Marshall Banks, a Western freshman, crossed those guidelines and was banned from the forum at the end of spring quarter 2009. His banning came after several warnings about inappropriate comments that had been flagged by other users. Forum users can flag posts they deem inappropriate by clicking a button on each post.

Jon Bash, a Western freshman and one of the four moderators of the forum, said he sent Banks a few  private messages warning him of his behavior. The final straw came when the user made an inappropriate joke on the forum.

“I have no ill feelings toward the forum or the advisory board. I post a lot to try to be funny, but I do try to have a serious message behind that,” Banks said.

Michael Schardein, the officer for Western's University Judicial Affairs has been a reference for Peterson and the advisory board, Peterson said. He helped them with any questions they had about dealing with student conduct in an online setting, Peterson said.

Schardein said because the forum is through the university, it falls under the Students Rights and Responsibility Code. This code is under Washington Administrative Code and has 38 sections including a section on disruptive behavior and freedom of expression.

Under the disruptive behavior section, the code states:

Disruptive behavior is whenever a student engages in any behavior which interferes with the rights of others or which materially or substantially obstructs or disrupts teaching, learning research or administrative functions. While students have the right to freedom of expression, including the right to dissent or protest, this expression cannot interfere with the rights of others.

Because the forum falls under this code, any user posting in the forum is subject to these standards, Schardein said.
Banks was not the first user to have been banned, Peterson said. There have been seven users total, including Banks, who have been banned, Peterson said. However, Banks was the first user who really brought attention to his banning, Peterson said. Since then a thread has opened up called “Bring Back Ogrim”  that is filled with discussion as to whether his removal was founded.

Many comments in the thread were in favor of the moderator’s decision, but there were many were against it. In fact, after a review of the “Bring Back Ogrim” thread there was almost an equal number of posts that were in favor as opposed to those that were not.

Banks said he was surprised the thread even started. He had originally posted under a friend’s user name letting people know he had been banned. This wasn’t to show he was mad, or to get people talking about it, he said he just wanted people in the thread to know why he had stopped posting, he said. He said he was a very active user in the forum.

Western junior Peter Johnston said he is also an active user in the forum. Although he said he has never met Banks personally, he had much to say in the “Bring Back Ogrim” thread. Johnston said he is invested in a more open dialogue environenvironment for the forum. He said if anyone is banned, he would want to create discussion about it, as it is a fellow Western student and people should be interested.

Banks said when he was banned he was never informed of it beforehand. He said he had received warnings from the moderators about his inappropriate comments, but nothing about being removed from the forum. It was not until he tried to log in and found out he could not. He received an e-mail from Peterson two days later explaining that he had been banned and why. If he wants to get back on the forum, he will have to appeal his case in the fall, Banks said.

“I do plan on making an appeal. I think the banning is and isn’t fair,” Banks said. “I understand why the forum banned me, however I think the banning process should be changed.”

The comment Banks made came in a forum entitled “Trying to make a profit.” The forum was about graduation tickets and how expensive they were. In the first post on the forum, the user  “valleygirl” made the comment,
“Help a fellow college student out and don't rape them of $60, or the latest $120!!!”

The discussion that followed focused mostly on this comment. Some argued that rape should not be used as slang, and others argued that it should not be a big deal. Twenty-two comments later, Banks made his contribution,
“There’s no such thing as rape, just surprise sex.”

The comment was flagged shortly after and removed. Banks said he was not making the joke to be offensive, but that he had made it to try to lighten the discussion.

“Anyone can flag my post and it will go under scrutiny, but no one takes into account the people that thought the post was funny,” Banks said.

This is Banks' second ban after an initial temporary ban mid-March of 2009, which came after five or six warnings, Peterson said. After the first time, he sent an e-mail to the advisory board apologizing for his actions. Since then, Peterson said he received two or three more warnings before the advisory board moved into this permanent ban.
Western freshman Jon Bash, one of the moderators of the forum, said although Banks often had many interesting things to say, they often teetered between appropriate and offensive.

“He definitely inflamed a lot of people's sensibilities and tended to offend people,” Bash said.

Johnston said it is not necessarily the ban he is speaking out against, rather the transparency of the issue. Stating the reasons Banks was banned, or explanations from administration of what Banks did that crossed the line specifically would help the situation, especially since he was not banned for the one comment. Discussion would get the students in the forum involved and able to correct and monitor their own mistakes, Johnston said.

According to Peterson, the guidelines for the forum are mostly based on a case–by-case basis and what is brought to the attention of advisory board by forum members.

However, Peterson said the advisory board has drafted a Terms of Service  agreement form they hope to launch in the fall. This form would either come in a page where the user clicks on an agreement button or in e-mail form so each user has explicit understanding of what the forum's policies on conduct are and what actions will be taken if those are broken. The advisory board is waiting until the fall to launch it because they expect forum use to decrease quite a bit during the summer, Peterson said.

Johnston said if a user is simply banned without any discussion, no one really benefits or learns from the situation. Johnston said by discussing cases that were banned, it might help explain cases that seemed more ambiguous to the guidelines. It would give more students a chance to give their thoughts and feelings on the situation. This would help shape a stronger set of guidelines, Johnston said.

“If you need to take it away, then take it away but talk about it. Be really forthright. Open up a thread about what happened, why they did this, and better ways to approach it,” Johnston said.

Peterson said although there were seven users banned, the administration does attempt to leave up as much content as possible.

“There's a lot of stuff up there that I personally feel uncomfortable with but we want to leave as much of what people say as possible,” Peterson said.

Of the seven users banned, the first four were banned in one weekend, Peterson said. These users came to the forum with an onslaught of inappropriate comments and obscene language, Peterson said.

The other two users were warned multiple times and then banned for inappropriate content, much like Banks. They were warned for obscene statements that did not contribute to the conversation as well as  “trolling”—purposefully making rude comments or attacking others just for the sake of doing so.

“[We] try to keep conversation civil and promote civil discourse, as well as enforce the guidelines of the forums,” Bash said.

However, some users question whether that action is enough. Johnston said he understands the need for monitoring a forum. However, he said for a learning environment it is important to create dialogue about situations like this.

“Instead of being an invisible hand that silences whatever inappropriate comment it was, talk about it and open that discussion up so it can be discussed at a level that people can understand,” Johnston said.

Be first to comment on this article

Only registered users can post comments.
Please login or register.