a somewhat ridiculous way to induce good behavior

[aimeeandbeatles]

This may be a pain to implement though, but if a person goes a while without getting an infarction they can get points that can be used against infractions. For example say I go a month with good behavior , I might earn one point. Then I get a two-point infraction. i could use that point to reduce the infraction to a one-point. I dont think you should be able to reverse bans with it, but maybe reduce it from maybe a week to five days or something.

its ridiculous

 

[Joecoolyo]

Rewarding good behavior is never ridiculous.

 

[Earthling]

I don't think the OP's suggestion is necessary.

I would agree if they wanted to actually remove old infractions from people's records though, especially with time or general "good behavior".

As we all know or should know, infractions don't actually get removed from your record even if it's been implied otherwise, there's still a list of things that go back 1, 2, x years even if the actual "points" are long expired. And I don't particularly see the point of what this is actually good for either - users can't view this full list that I know of, you can't view the infraction history of anyone else obviously, and I personally would think it rather shouldn't be used as criteria for a mod to give you future infractions. If you trip the language filter or whatever I would hope the mods aren't deciding whether to infract based on if you tripped the langauge filter a year ago or something like that - in other words these long-expired infractions.

 

[JollyRoger]

As we all know or should know, infractions don't actually get removed from your record even if it's been implied otherwise, there's still a list of things that go back 1, 2, x years even if the actual "points" are long expired. And I don't particularly see the point of what this is actually good for either - users can't view this full list that I know of, you can't view the infraction history of anyone else obviously, and I personally would think it rather shouldn't be used as criteria for a mod to give you future infractions.

I like the permanent record. It provides a handy index and link to my best posts.

 

[Heretic_Cata]

I agree with the OP - this way we could bring back ChocolateUSA !

 

[ainwood]

Infractions expire, which means that after you get one, wait 10 days (for a one point one), and the point expires.

We are not about to let people "bank" good behavior to enable them to break rules later.

 

[Abaddon]

In effect having 8 unused infractions is the same... Everyone had 8 "banked". Youcan marginaly break the rules ~ 3 times, should you wish, per month.

 

[Lord Baal]

Infractions expire, which means that after you get one, wait 10 days (for a one point one), and the point expires.

We are not about to let people "bank" good behavior to enable them to break rules later.

This. I don't think I've had an infraction in a year. Theoretically, should someone somehow piss me off, I could blatantly flame and troll that poster in numerous threads yet not be banned, since I'd have twelve points "banked" in addition to the eight that are already "banked" for everyone when they have no infraction. Essentially I'd be able to flame a person nine times at two-points a post and still not get banned. That's just asking for trouble.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Another thing, though, I dont think that the points should be used against "major" infractions, just small things such as swearing. And I dont think you should be able to remove an infraction completely unless its a 1-pointer (do they have half-point infractions?).

 

[LucyDuke]

The reward for not breaking the rules is not getting banned.

 

[Lord Baal]

The reward for not breaking the rules is not getting banned.

Exactly. You don't break the rules, you get to keep posting. You break them, you don't post.

 

[Plotinus]

The fundamental problem with the idea is that it implies that breaking the rules is a desirable thing, something to "reward" people with. But we don't want people to be breaking the rules at all! If someone had behaved well, that's great. Letting them get away with extra rule-breaking on the strength of it would send completely the wrong message, because we want them to continue to follow the rules. If we were to say "Behave well and you'll be allowed to break the rules for a bit" then we are telling people that rule-breaking is a desirable action and a sort of treat.

Also, if you really think an idea is ridiculous, why suggest it at all?

 

[Abaddon]

Its how someone introduces something they are not sure of, but want to cover their back from potential ridicule

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Also, if you really think an idea is ridiculous, why suggest it at all?

"You would make a ship sail against the winds and currents by lighting a bon-fire under her deck? I have no time for such nonsense."
- Napoleon, on Robert Fulton's Steamship

 

[GhostWriter16]

"You would make a ship sail against the winds and currents by lighting a bon-fire under her deck? I have no time for such nonsense."
- Napoleon, on Robert Fulton's Steamship

Actually, I see the point of your post, to reduce the effect of infractions, but ainwood explained pretty well the problems with it. What I personally think the problem is is that expired infractions stay on your record forever, and, even if its been months or years, will still make mods quicker to infract you.

Maybe instead of allowing you to break the rules more you could remove an infraction that already expired, or allow expired infractions to be removed two months after expiration.

 

[JollyRoger]

I think infraction records should be made public so that moderator actions are exposed to a bit more sunlight.

 

[GhostWriter16]

I think infraction records should be made public so that moderator actions are exposed to a bit more sunlight.

Why?

I think this would actually weaken the mods, because if they made a bad call all the world would see it and think to themselves "Really?" Then, people would inevitably have less respect for the mods. Bad idea.

 

[JollyRoger]

That's exactly why they should be public. Bad calls need to be exposed.

 

[GhostWriter16]

That's exactly why they should be public. Bad calls need to be exposed.

Eh. The mods would never do it, whether its a good idea or not. Let's drop it.

 

[JollyRoger]

It should at least be a user option to have one's infraction history public.