1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

Rule Change: Publication of Infraction Appeal Threads

Discussion in 'Site Feedback' started by Camikaze, Apr 21, 2015.

  1. Camikaze

    Camikaze Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    26,843
    Location:
    Sydney
    Staff has decided to trial the publication of appeals threads, with the aim of enhancing the transparency of the infraction system. In short, all formal appeals will now be published in a public forum upon their completion. These will not be open for comment, and PDMA rules will still apply to them. However, they will hopefully give an insight into the reasoning process behind certain decisions.

    Please note that this change is being implemented on a trial basis. Publication will take place until the end of September 2015. During October staff will decide whether to permanently implement the change.

    Please also note that there have been some additional minor wording changes to the appeals process.

    The old appeals rules are as follows:
    Spoiler :
    APPEALING MODERATOR ACTIONS
    The Process
    If, after having tried to work it out by privately with the moderator, as required above, a poster still feels that they have been wrongly infracted or banned, they may ask for a review of the infraction or the ban by the SUPERMODS. This new process replaces the previous process of appealing to the ADMINS. All reviews follow the same steps.

    1. Member PMs a designated supermod
    2. The supermod acknowledges the PM and posts the request in the infraction review subforum (a non public forum)
    3. Clearly frivolous requests will be dismissed and the poster notified that their request has been denied
    4. Non frivolous requests will be reviewed by at least three supermods, one of whom will be from the area of the forums where the infraction took place.
    5. The mod who gave the infraction will be asked to clarify their reasoning on the infraction.
    6. Poster is notified of the outcome
    7. The decision of this panel is final and no further appeals will be considered by the Supermods or Admins.

    The Details

    Send a PM to one of the Super Moderators. You can find a list of all supermoderators at the bottom of This Page. They have the responsibility to start the process. If you have not received an acknowledgement within 24 hours, you may resend your request to a different supermod on this list. Warnings are not reviewable; don’t waste our time.

    Requests for review are required to be presented in a polite manner. Posters should include the following with a request for review. Failure to include all of this information may result in your request being denied out of hand. This initial PM is your opportunity to tell your side of the story. Once the process starts, you may not be contacted until it is over. Incivility or abusive language will not help your cause.
    --Reference to infraction in question.
    --All previous PMs with the mod issuing the infraction.
    --Why you think that the infraction is wrong.
    --What outcome you are seeking.

    IMPORTANT! - Please note that the requests of posters who persistently ask for a review for all, almost all, or most of their infractions (you know who you are) will not be granted, and those posters will generally be dealt with in the same manner as those who abuse the report posts function. The drive behind this change is to provide an opportunity for people who genuinely feel they have been wrongly infracted to have that infraction re-examined by a panel of the more experienced supermods; we will not allow frivolous requests to clog up the infraction system with even more unnecessary paperwork.


    The new rules are as follows:
    Your comments on this rule change are welcome.
     
  2. Valka D'Ur

    Valka D'Ur Hosting Iron Pen in A&E Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    19,235
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
    I recommend stickying this thread, since people don't usually notice the "Full Rules" unless there's something specific they're looking for.
     
  3. Sonereal

    Sonereal Call Me Ish Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    14,713
    I can dig this. /u/changetip_bot +10 Satoshi /u/Camikaze

    I second sticking this thread.
     
  4. Camikaze

    Camikaze Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    26,843
    Location:
    Sydney
    Good idea.
     
  5. BvBPL

    BvBPL Pour Decision Maker

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Messages:
    7,116
    Location:
    At the bar
    Three questions

    Can a poster opt to decline publication of an appeal? At what time should such a request be made?



    Will frivolous appeals be published?


    Can start a thread to lay out odds in whether or not this will be continued after the trial period?


    Jest aside, I like the idea of a specified and limited trial period.
     
  6. Camikaze

    Camikaze Administrator Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    26,843
    Location:
    Sydney
    1) No, a poster cannot opt to decline publication. It is part and parcel of an appeal. If there is something that the poster particularly doesn't want publicly disclosed, they are free to mention that to the presiding supermod, who may take it into account in deciding what to redact from the published thread (e.g. if someone has disclosed personal information but wants to appeal, they might mention that they'd prefer their personal information stay private, and a supermod would likely agree to that). However, consent is only required for the publication of the private message correspondence between the infracting moderator and the poster (and other similarly relevant private messages).

    2) Anything that gets an appeal thread will be published. Generally if a supermod thinks an appeal is frivolous they'll still start the appeal thread to get other opinions. Theoretically though, they could just reject an appeal out of hand. However, I don't think this has ever been done.
     
  7. Mise

    Mise isle of lucy

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Messages:
    28,560
    Location:
    London, UK
    I really do think that this is a positive change. Greater transparency leads to greater trust in general, but specifically for this forum, the problem I've had in the past is that mods have to publicly "toe the party line", which makes it feel as though all the mods are out to get you. I know that in private, there is a great deal of debate over contentious changes or borderline infractions/bans, but in public it's "we all stand by the decision". This makes it more difficult for me to believe that I got a fair hearing.

    I think that just showing that a debate is happening -- a genuine discussion, where different views are aired -- will make people trust the process a lot more. And therefore, people will trust the decisions a lot more, hopefully leading to a reduction in appeals, and maybe even a reduction in infractions.

    Anyway, lets see how this goes. :goodjob:
     
  8. Sir Bugsy

    Sir Bugsy Civ.D.

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2003
    Messages:
    7,829
    Location:
    Berkshires
  9. Kyriakos

    Kyriakos Alien spiral maker

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Messages:
    49,561
    Location:
    Thessalonike, The Byzantine Empire
    Well, good luck with the more work to be generated with the appeal threads. I think ultimately it is not a good idea, given a forum is not just not a democracy, but moreover each forum is its own non-democracy in its own particular way, and i think that examining which way that is in any of those forums is a rather dull way to spend one's time, even not counting the inherent abstract or arbitrary manner in which such things can change.

    Again, good luck to the mods. Happy that it's been quite some time that i do not appeal stuff :smug:
     
  10. illram

    illram Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,218
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Our hope is this not only shows transparency in the process but provides mods and posters alike a better framework for understanding the rules going forward.
     
  11. JollyRoger

    JollyRoger Slippin' Jimmy Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2001
    Messages:
    42,636
    Location:
    Chicago Sunroofing
    I will do my part in making this project successful by providing some borderline infractable content.
     
  12. Valka D'Ur

    Valka D'Ur Hosting Iron Pen in A&E Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    19,235
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Red Deer, Alberta, Canada
    I approve of trial periods for new things. If it works, great. We'll have a positive change. If it doesn't work, it's a learning experience. Either way, it will at least have been tried.

    :thumbsup:
     
  13. Maniacal

    Maniacal the green Napoleon

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    18,776
    Location:
    British Columbia, Canada
    I hope this works out well. More clarity is always a good thing.
     
  14. Civ'ed

    Civ'ed I ain't gotta explain a thing

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    6,315
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Aberdonia et Banffia
    I endorse this :D
     
  15. Double A

    Double A WAAAH

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2009
    Messages:
    14,006
    Location:
    NC
    Wow, cool. I really hope this works out like I and others have been claiming.
     
  16. omegaflames

    omegaflames Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2012
    Messages:
    91
    IMO good change. There is a reason why if you are accused of breaking some law that your trial be open to the public and I think that even on forums/whatnot that kind of thing should also be public.
     
  17. Sonereal

    Sonereal Call Me Ish Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    14,713
    Plus we get to write fun little case briefs after each case.
     
  18. ywhtptgtfo

    ywhtptgtfo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    1,341
    Steps 5-7 are existing. Adding step 8 is a step forward but not enough.

    This still does not address the issue that the requester is completely shut out of the debate in Steps 5-8, be it public or in private. I've been through this process before to report bad behaviour of a moderator and I found it to be insufficient. At the very least, reporter should be in on the discussion at Step 6.
     
  19. pigswill

    pigswill fly (one day)

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    8,619
    Location:
    berkshire, england
    Its a change in the direction of transparency. Expecting radical reform is optimistic but incremental reform is still reform.

    Its now a matter of people posting in a civilised manner to demonstrate to the admins that reform doesn't always lead to anarchy and then you can argue in favour of further reform.
     
  20. Thlayli

    Thlayli Le Pétit Prince

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2005
    Messages:
    10,413
    Location:
    In the desert
    It's in everyone's best interest that this reform go smoothly. As others have mentioned, it's a step in the right direction.

    This doesn't remove the need for further transparency and clarity, especially the truncation of the PDMA policy, but the orderly rollout and success of this change in the following months will hopefully give the CFC reform community the leverage to push for further reforms in the future.
     

Share This Page