[QUERY] Stigmatizing Dispatches/Factbooks

[Vurk]

Greetings!

First of all, It is hard to type for a title for this subject. Stigmatizing may not be the correct word, but as a non-native English speaker I am having hard time to find correct word for it. Because stigmatize includes negative meaning besides marking one as "that one". Though, I tried to mean, dispatches/factbooks telling "which user is what" kind of factbook. Is it a certain rule break or lies in a gray area?

My idea is, putting annoying type of users decided by "us" into a list in a dispatch. No shaming, no discussion, no pins but what they did, what they disagreed and refuses to apologise about it. Hey, technically, if someone makes a dispatch like that, which only tells what person did what, it should be legal.

However, still, I can't make it but somehow I feel like there is something is wrong about this, and I decided to apply here to ask this idea first, rather than explaining my intent to a moderator if that would be the case.

[Fahran]

Given how easily this could lead to harassment, I'm inclined to say that this would almost certainly violate the rules, though you should note that we do not make decisions based on hypotheticals. That said, there are a wide variety of tools to ensure that your community does not have a need to interact with people it finds disagreeable. You can impose regional bans on people. You can put people on your Foe List. You can ban people from RP threads and other threads where thread ownership is present. There are flaws in these tools, certainly, but they're a good deal more rule-abiding and appropriate than setting up a naughty list via dispatches/factbooks.