To my mind, Ban has always meant permanent.
“You’re banned from this place! You’ll never be allowed in again!”
While I’ve always thought of Suspend as being temporary.
“You’re being suspended from school for 1 week, over fighting.”
Ban:
- to prohibit especially by legal means
- bar entry
- to debar temporarily especially from a privilege, office, or function
- a: to cause to stop temporarily
b: to set aside or make temporarily inoperative - to defer to a later time on specified conditions
- to hold in an undetermined or undecided state awaiting further information
When I hear someone mention they were banned my reaction is: “Holy shit! WTF did you do to earn that!” Then I find out it was only for a day or three: “Oh… That’s not a Ban! That’s minor. Go touch grass. You’ll be fine.”
I’ve been banned from subreddits and communities a few times. At least once I never even noticed because it was so short.
How is it a Ban if I didn’t even notice?
Why did Ban in online forums and games, come to mean temporary?
Is it simply an example of the intensification of language? To make something mundane, seem more severe than it is?
Does it bother anyone else? Or am I alone here?
Your definitions seem to explain it already.
A ban bars you from entry into a space. A temporary ban temporarily bars you from entry into a space. A Lemmy community in this instance is the space you are being barred from entering.
Either way you have been barred from entry, just some are short term, not all are permanent.
I think it is just semantics and you are overthinking it.
But the word for a Temporary Ban, is Suspend, not Ban.
Every time I hear about a ban, I have to take a moment to remind myself and ask: “Do they mean ban or suspend?”
It’s annoying. I’m hoping there’s a good reason for it.They’re not synonymous.
You don’t suspend a customer from a bar, temporarily or permanently. Suspension implies membership, or access being limited. Your membership to a club can be suspended. Your access to Walmart can’t be. You’re banned from the store, whether for a year or a lifetime. As there’s no barrier to entry, it doesn’t make sense to suspend the privilege of access.
This is all ignoring that banning a person from a limited access club is also perfectly fine, because the definition of ban is applicable either way. There aren’t really many situations where suspension would be valid but ban wouldn’t. Maybe some small subset of privileges could be suspended where “ban” is a little weird, because general access is still permitted.
But temporary ban makes perfect sense. (Ignoring that it’s been standard terminology for 30 years.)
They’re not synonymous.
That’s what I explained. “a Temporary Ban, is Suspend, not Ban.”
it doesn’t make sense to suspend the privilege of access.
That’s the only thing it makes sense to suspend. What else would you suspend? (excluding the meaning of hanging something up)
A temporary ban is a ban. Nowhere in your definition is length of time, because a ban can be for any length of time.
You could suspend specific privileges within a club, without suspending all access. That’s the only case where suspension would make sense where ban would be odd.
You can’t “suspend” access when access is available to the general public. You suspend a privilege that’s not the default. It doesn’t make sense to suspend something that is the default. Taking away access requires proactively preventing it, not removing a membership.
You could suspend specific privileges within a club, without suspending all access.
That’s what a “Ban” here and at reddit means. You can still access and see the sub or community, it’s only your post and comment privileges that get Suspended.
In Games a “Ban” means your access to play online with others is Suspended, not your access to use any single player modes or features.
You’re missing the point. I’m saying that there are contrived situations where there are privileges that are not access that you could suspend without the word “ban” making sense.
Any case where you block access to anything for any length of time can correctly be defined as a ban.
But would more correctly (specifically) be defined as Suspend.
Like on a multiple choice test question with two answers that are “correct”, one is more specific, and thus the “right” answer.
A lot of bans are permanent. The word is used inclusively. At the moment you are banning someone, you may not especially care to reassure them it will only be temporary. You may not even have decided if it’s temporary or not. And anyway bans can be lifted. There is no hard requirement of permanence in that word. So no, it doesn’t bother me as it seems to bother you.
That makes sense. Thank you for giving an actual answer.
I’ve been temporarily banned in real life before. I had a sip of a friend’s drink at the campus bar while I was underage and they banned me for a year.
Sorry. I replied to the wrong comment.
To my mind, Ban has always meant permanent.
I’m not sure where you got that association from. Even the dictionary definition you gave says nothing about permanence.
It says nothing about time at all. It doesn’t say it’s limited in any way.
It also doesn’t say permanent.
But why would you assume it’s not? Generally if something is temporary, it’s explicitly defined that way.
Can you name another time limited condition or situation which doesn’t include that aspect in it’s definition?Why would you assume anything at all? It also isn’t explicitly defined as permanent either.
It isn’t explicitly defined as temporary because it doesn’t have to be temporary. It isn’t explicitly defined as permanent because it doesn’t have to be permanent. The word could be used in either situation.
Traditionally terms for temporary things include that aspect in their definition, like the definitions of Suspend I gave.
By tradition of definition, permanent is implied unless otherwise defined.Can you give an example of a word for a temporary condition or situation, that isn’t explicitly defined as such?
Neither is implied unless otherwise defined. I’m saying that it isn’t necessarily temporary either. It’s not explicitly defined as temporary because it doesn’t have to be temporary.
Can you give an example of a word for a temporary condition or situation, that isn’t explicitly defined as such?
Ban isn’t a term for temporary things. It can be used for both. At which point a clarification needs to be provided “temporary” or “permanent” ban.
Suspension isn’t the opposite of ban. Suspension is temporary.
Suspension isn’t the opposite of ban. Suspension is temporary.
That’s exactly what I’m saying. People and places keep using the term Ban when it’s temporary, and Suspension the closer fit.
Probably because “Ban” is shorter & easier to write
Net terminology just changed over time.
It used to be, both in games and on forums, that a ‘ban’ typically implied that it was permanent, or for a considerable amount of time, like multiple weeks or a month or more, or until removed from a banlist.
If a ban was temporary, it would be qualified by clarifying that it was a temporary ban.
Otherwise, just using ‘ban’ almost always meant a permanent ban.
A ‘kick’, on the other hand, usually meant direct ejection from a game in the moment, and maybe 15 or 30 minutes of inability to rejoin, or an inability to rejoin that temporary session… though the terminology varied more from forum to forum.
This was just the common lingo used by many earlier games and forums in their own code, in their own technical documentation for server administration.
…
Likewise, ‘pm’ (private message) became ‘dm’ (direct message).
I’m pretty sure Discord is entirely responsible for that.
They started calling private chats ‘direct messages’ even though basically every forum or what have you up till Discord called them ‘private chats’ or ‘private messages’.
EDIT: Evidently Twitter actually started this trend 2 years before Discord, I did not know this as I have hated the concept of Twitter since its inception and never used it =P
…
‘Mods’ / ‘Modding’ / ‘Modder’, as in game mods, used to exclusively mean that you (and others, in a multiplayer game) were using or creating additional community content that altered game mechanics, almost always in a constructive way that added to the game experience for everyone.
‘
Warez’ / ‘Cheats’ / ‘Hacks’ used to specifically refer to … things that are arguably, technically ‘Mods’, but manipulate your experience of the game to give you a (theoretically) covert series of advantages over the game such that competiton is now blatantly unfair.Those terms are still used to mean that… but, as less and less games support modding, and more and more switched away from having server browsers to just having a ‘find match’ button… with a whole lot of those kinds of games, ‘Modding’ now just means cheating or hacking.
If you got to a GTA V game or community and say ‘I’m a modder’ they will interperet that as ‘I am a cheater’, not ‘I make and have made mods for one or many PC games.’
…
All of these newer uses of the terms are still ‘correct’ in the sense that you can justify the meanings of the newer terms, its not like they’re misnomers…
… but a lot of zoomers / casuals have little to no understanding of how the terminology changes are confusing to an older gamer who finds themselves in a community of younger folks.
You’ve got “Warez” wrong, it’s explicitly (and always has been) pirated software.
Derp, you’re correct.
Amazing write up!
Likewise, ‘pm’ (private message) became ‘dm’ (direct message).
I’m pretty sure Discord is entirely responsible for that.
They started calling private chats ‘direct messages’ even though basically every forum or what have you up till Discord called them ‘private chats’ or ‘private messages’.
Twitter was calling them DMs in 2013, this was probably influencing the language while Discord was being designed ahead of its 2015 launch.
Ah!
I did not know that, as I have always despised, and never used Twitter.
Added a correction in, thanks =D
They started calling them Direct Messages since they aren’t actually “private.” It was about false advertising, it’s not actually a private message, it isn’t encrypted.
No one wanted a court case thrown at them where “private messages” were supposed to be private. They took private out of the name to protect themselves legally since there is nothing private about a direct message.
I’ve always felt like “ban” is more like a manual operarion, you’re banned until someone manually unbans you. While a kick or suspension expires on its own.
Thank you! Your thorough and thoughtful response is a breath of fresh air.
Autistic elder gamer (I’m 35 rofl) at your service lol.
I reformatted my post and added a bit to it.
But yeah… its not that the newer terms / usage of terms is like, objectively incorrect.
It is that language is actually nowhere near as objective and unchanging as most people seem to think, and words have a whole bunch of connotations and implied meanings that most people don’t even realize they are taking for granted.
We also use “Block” when it’s really mute.
Sort of. I thought that for a long time also, because that’s the way reddit worked for years.
But some people didn’t like that people they blocked could still see and comment on their stuff without their knowledge. So it became a real block.
Nothing in the definition of ban says it has to be permanent.
Nothing implies it’s anything other than permanent. While Suspend explicitly defines itself as a temporary Ban.
No, it doesn’t imply anything, you’re inferring.
Definitions are written to be clear. Anything beyond that is the reader’s inference.
Traditionally terms for temporary things include that aspect in their definition, like the definitions of Suspend I gave. By tradition of definition, permanent is implied unless otherwise defined.
Can you give an example of a word for a temporary condition or situation, that isn’t explicitly defined as such?
That’s just straight not true. For instance hunger. It’s definition doesn’t say it’s temporary but that doesn’t mean it’s permanent.
Here is a little bit of muddiness. If there is no clearly defined end of something, is it permanent, or temporary? I would argue, since nearly everything changes and virtually nothing is permanent in an absolute sense; Permanent can only reasonably mean, no predetermined end time. Hunger has no defined amount of time. It may in fact last until death, making it quite permanent from the point of view of the individual experiencing it. So hunger in fact would, for the purpose of a definition, be permanent.
Yeah okay, but you don’t say I’m temporarily hungry the same way you don’t need to say I’m temporarily banned.
You’re hungry until you eat. You are banned until you are unbanned.
There isn’t a predetermined end point with hunger. No timer. That’s the difference.
The difference between ban and suspend isn’t a temporal difference. Here’s the Cambridge dictionary definition of “suspend”:
to stop something from being active, either temporarily or permanently (see: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/suspend)
Here’s the definition for “ban”:
to forbid (= refuse to allow) something, especially officially (see https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/ban?q=Ban)
The difference between the two is the subject: an active process or service can be suspended, but something specific (e.g. an action, object or person) can be banned. Ban also implies a more official act in order to punish someone or prevent something (Johnny was banned from entering the bus), whereas a suspension doesn’t necessarily have that ‘negative’ context (e.g. the bus service was suspended, which doesn’t imply this happened because the bus driver was drunk or something).
In a more Lemmy-specific context, you could say you suspended someone’s access to the platform, or that you banned them from the platform. Neither way of saying it implies anything about the duration. You can’t however really say you suspended someone from the platform, that doesn’t really work.
In this context, I think the direct implication that a ban is handed out because someone did something bad is a lot clearer than when you use the word suspension. Because of that I believe ban to be the more context-appropriate word here. Suspend does not carry that connotation as something can be suspended for a whole host of reasons, none of which have to be related to rule-breaking. For example, federation with another instance could be suspended temporarily until the other instance does (or doesn’t do) something that is required for technical reasons.
Online there’s basically 3 levels of ban, temp ban, ban, and permaban.
Temp ban, the offender is not allowed to interact temporarily usually for a set amount of time before its automatically lifted, they get put in timeout for a bit.
Ban, more permanent sibling of the temp ban, doesn’t automatically lift after a set amount of time, can be lifted manually by admin/mods, usually leaves one possible channel of comms open for the offender to make appeals to the admins/mods. They’ve been kicked out of the bar, they’re not allowed back, but maybe in a while management will soften their stance.
Permaban, you do not pass go, you do not collect 200, you’re permanently gone, no take backs, these are basically never undone and basically no one except for the highest level of admins can undo it. You dun fucked up, the bar’s management is beyond pissed at you and you will never ever be back again, bouncers have your photo and it is damn near on sight with them.
It seems like most people conflate temp ban and regular ban. They’re both pretty common and the difference between them is basically one has an automatic timer so calling something a ban, temporary or regular just gets called a ban.
most people conflate temp ban and regular ban.
Which is why I’m implying (and now flatly saying) a Temp Ban should be renamed to a Suspension. For clarity.
And what’s to stop people from still saying “I got banned” even when it’s called a suspension?
This feels a lot like the “We have 15 different cable standards, let’s make a universal one!” creates new cable standard “We have 16 different cable standards now…” situation.
Even if the language we currently use is slightly ambiguous, one or two questions clears up the ambiguity and still gets across the idea of “I can’t post right now.” And comparatively asking an extra question sounds a lot easier than reworking something culturally ingrained in our lexicon.
My original question wasn’t about changing anything at this point. It was about when and why this change in usage happened.
But with all the push back saying I’m actually wrong, I’ve instead been forced into a place where I have to defend the dictionary.
I’m not arguing for a new standard. I’m saying there was a standard, and somehow we got off it; And are now we’re in a place of ambiguity.That’s just how language works. It changes and morphs as time goes on and culture leaders change. And in my last, idk 20 or so years on the internet I’ve never really seen the word suspension used. It’s always been temp ban, ban or permaban.
I agree and in most services a temporary restriction of an account is called a suspension (though colloquially terms like “3 day ban” have become common).
Banning usually involves deleting or locking the user out of the account in an irrevocable manner.
“Permaban” is the word you’re looking for.
I’m pretty sure Permaban only exists because people started using Ban as temporary.
Permaban is redundant.Back in my day we had both tempbans and permabans as two types of ban. If you wanted to explicitly specify, you’d use one of those terms.
It’s not redundant to have more specific terms. Assumptions like yours are exactly why disambiguation is useful.
Maybe my day is older than yours.
I think statistically that’s likely.
A ban is imposed on a person or an action. It can be rescinded at any time, but remains in place until it is explicitly rescinded. An expiration can be included in the terms of the ban, which automatically rescinds the ban after a set duration. The base definition of “ban” implies nothing about duration. Without clarification, any assumption regarding duration is baseless. Such clarification can be direct, such as including a clear statement of the period for which the ban is in place during the issuance of the ban, or indirect, such as context clues regarding the severity of the infraction that led to the ban being issued.
A suspension is placed upon statuses, privileges, credentials, or the like. Suspension is, by nature, a transitory state. Examples include being suspended from a job pending investigation of behavior, having one’s club membership suspended until club dues are brought current, or having one’s login credentials suspended while one’s account appears to be compromised. The transitory nature of a suspension implies that it resolves upon completion (or inaction on) of a task related to the object of the suspension. Upon completion of the sub-task, status is either reinstated or terminated. In the previous examples: employment is terminated upon conclusion of an investigation that proves the employee acted inappropriately, club membership is reinstated once payment of the outstanding balance is verified, account credentials are reinstated with access limitations once the account owner proves they are in control of the account.
Suspension is a step along the path to termination or revocation, not to a ban. The two terms are not directly related in that way. There can be overlap, but they are not different degrees of the same concept.
Ban just means you are not allowed to do something. You can add a qualifier to note how long it is but on its own, there is no implied timeframe, it could be short or long no problem. A permanent ban means explicitly it will not be lifted after a certain period of time.
A suspension means that you stop doing something but you could expect to restart. In most contexts this is on a temporary basis, but you can specify an “indefinite suspension”, which practically is the same as a permanent ban, but perhaps connotating greater chance to appeal it or some conditions that may occur at an indeterminate point that would lift the suspension.
there is no implied timeframe
If it’s not implied that it ever ends, how long would it last? Forever seems the reasonable answer. And as far as I know that was the prevailing assumption until 20ish years ago. I’m asking how and why that changed.
I think you misread their response. It’d be similar to ask “How long does a timeout last” - it depends on the time affixed to the state - timeouts have no inherently defined length.
I think
banin the tech world was originally understood to be permanent - but in the real world ban has always had the flexibility to have an assigned term. As the internet has grown it seems that ban is gradually returning to being non-permanent though a lot of systems will still differentiate between a ban (permanent) and a suspension (temporary) - though, again, there are instances I’ve seen of “Account permanently Suspended.”A Time-out has Time in the word itself.
The definition also explicitly mentions a limited time, and uses the word Suspension that I already showed means temporary.
Right. Often times when something is banned, it is usually banned “until further notice” hence permanent or indeterminate length, but not always. It’s the qualifier that will specify whether a ban is temporary or not.
The Prohibition Era was a time when alcohol was banned indefinitely, until it was repealed. Campfire bans generally are only during the season when the risk of fire is high or are disallowed during specific times of day, and those have been around for a while. Being grounded is a ban on going anywhere until a kid meets their parents’ wishes or after a certain time. Temporary parking restrictions for a special event or snow clearing have been around pre-internet and those are called parking bans. It’s not the ban itself that means permanent, even if there were a lot more uses of it meaning “until further notice”, than for a specific length. You could say that the usage of ban qualified with a specific time expiry is more common now than it did before, but I would argue it did exist in the past. Why that is, I could only guess.
I can go check a 20 year old dictionary in a few weeks when I visit family over the holidays and I can check if there’s a significantly different definition.
I dunno, I’m with you on this OP. Ban implies permanency, suspension implies temporary.
deleted by creator
To my mind, Ban has always meant permanent.
Then explain perma-ban
Joke aside though - ban is a toggle. You can toggle something on or off, but it usually implies something temporary. You can then manually unban someone at a later date, or have the unban be automated in some cases.
“I turned the lights on” - there is no expectation that you never turn them off again
“It is snowing outside” - at some point it will stop snowing
“I’m banned from my local book club for repeatedly asking if they made a movie for that one” - this too shall pass. Maybe in 4 years when I go back they’ll forgive me and let me back in, and by that time I’ll have watched Moby Dick - manual toggle of the ban back to ‘off’ is expected here.
“I was banned from Day9’s stream for backseating” - here the ban would have an automatic limit, maybe something like a million seconds.
Perma-ban started being used because people began using Ban when meaning something temporary.
