[raulus]

Hi Leon:

Thanks for raising this question, as I think it's worthy of some introspection and calm deliberation as we evaluate the best approach to take here. And while I am still a bit of a n00b around these parts, hopefully my opinion counts as something north of nothing, although others can debate just how big the spread should be there.

When I was a younger man, I would have encouraged you to go full old testament on them. Full lifetime ban, and erase them from existence. Now that I'm a little bit more of a seasoned chap, I'm inclined to be a bit less old testament, as I've learned that I need grace as much as the next fellow, and I'm grateful that death is no longer the punishment for even the most minor infractions.

At the same time, I am a big believer that all things should be done in wisdom and in order. Doing nothing seems like it could be a recipe for disaster, as acts of recidivism have the potential to harm those around us again, particularly if they are not familiar with the past indiscretions, high crimes, and misdemeanors against the hobby.

As an accountant, I’ve always found that a bit of disclosure is a helpful approach, as it is often short of more draconian censures, and yet still a lot more than nothing. I wonder if there might be some ability to disclose to the reader that the poster in question has been guilty in the past of misconduct in the industry. At the risk of going full Nathanial Hawthorne, maybe a big “F” for fraudster somewhere in their handle and/or in the footers to their posts? While still incredibly embarrassing and ignominious, this would at least allow the perpetrator an opportunity to move amongst us and participate in discussions, while still allowing the unsuspecting and trusting of us to be on notice about who we are dealing with.

Just an idea! And perhaps something that the technology might render difficult to address. But perhaps an option that walks the line between all or nothing.