Abaddon
Deity
Well no, its to do with TF being forgiving and essentially refusing to allow members to be perma banned unless in extreme cases.
The new infraction system explained
- Thread starter Mathilda
- Start date
GhostWriter16
Deity
This is simply untrue. There are a lot of "Gray areas", people with opinions that shouldn't be expressed here or ways of expressing them that aren't allowed on here, but that the rules do not clearly forbid.
If it was THE SAME OFFENSE 12 times you might have a point (Though sometimes a mod will infract for something another mod said was a-OK to post), but there are so many ways to break the rules on here its not even funny.
And so many ways that aren't even clear in the rules.
More or less this.
Is this not a good thing? Other than ad-spamming, what can you POSSIBLY do on here that would warrant permanent exile. Why should we not give people second-chances?
<snip>
Moderator Action: Now you each have a warning. This one is for PDMA.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Oh my gosh... sometimes I wish everyone could see some of the archives in the mod area. Believe me, there are much worse things people have done than ad spamming, and there are plenty of occasions where permanent bans are the only possible resolution.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2001
- Messages
- 30,080
Because then people are intentionally rude, obnoxious etc and feel that that is perfectly OK, as long as they only do it occasionally. If 15 or 20 people are behaving like that, then suddenly we have a forum in which there is always several people posting rude, obnoxious and inflammatory stuff. Not exactly good for maintaining a civil forum.
ParadigmShifter
Random Nonsense Generator
With long expiry times isn't it going to create more work for the mods since everyone would be much more likely to appeal an infraction? I've certainly just taken an infraction hit before when I could probably moan about it and bounce it around super mods etc.
Mods should be moderating (which they do very well in general) and not dealing with paperwork.
Mods should be moderating (which they do very well in general) and not dealing with paperwork.
It is rather uncivil to hand out an infraction.
ParadigmShifter
Random Nonsense Generator
It would be great if we could stop wars, prevent world hunger, and have fluffy bunnies doused in perfume appear every time we fart as well. That's what we would all prefer.
The point with 'gaming the system' under the proposed new system is that it would involve purposely getting more infractions and sustaining a high level of infractions.
There are plenty of valuable posters that would probably be gone by now under such an approach. The obvious reply would be "well maybe they shouldn't have broken the rules", but if actually removing them from the forums permanently lowers the quality of the forums, then it would be entirely counterproductive.
This would also be very harsh when combined with a low threshold for a ban.
I guess it depends upon the user, but a couple of weeks is going to be a pretty severe ban for some people, and a short ban for users. Three days does seem a reasonable length for a 'short' ban, although 24 hour bans also sound quite a nice idea.
Timeouts are a good strategy, especially if part of the goal is to cool down heated threads.
Well, you could make them public...
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2001
- Messages
- 30,080
Yeah - you're right. As forums co-admin, I should really concentrate my efforts on trying to stop wars and feed the homeless and those in drought areas, rather than improve the quality of the forums.
GhostWriter16
Deity
I think his point was, EVERYONE being Civil isn't realistic. And ANYONE being civil all the time isn't realistic. People get mad and people post inflammatory comments, if they do so here they should be dealt with, but not excessively so, everyone makes mistakes.
If a user is "Annoying" then we have ignore lists, we shouldn't be banning them as some people seem to think.
Giving a thread a TO and a user are very different. I give a thread a TO for of the following reasons:
*The thread is the kind that can, is, or has gone out of control
*Multiple, persistent reported posts
*Just a general desire to give people fair warning
My motivation is to keep the forums more civil and also to blunt the work that is created for a volunteer staff.
<personal opinion>
Giving TO's to users who lack self-control is indulgent and, IMO, doesn't do a lot to lead to overall improvement. People need to realize that the forum doesn't exist to coddle their childishness. It does not exist to be abused by people who lack impulse control. The mod staff are not their personal assistants, guidance counselors, or life coaches.
The rules don't exist to serve the posters. They exist to serve the forum.</personal opinion>
Well, if you're starting from scratch, then they'd have fair warning and ample time to
<personal opinion>See, to me I think a lot of our "problem" personalities are quite capable of behaving better, but they don't see any reason to. They like the attention. They like to be mischievious. Whatever/ </personal opinion>
ParadigmShifter
Random Nonsense Generator
Mischief is a bannable offence then?
GhostWriter16
Deity
By this logic, ANY banning is "Coddling Childishness." IMO giving a 24 hour ban to someone in a heated thread says "Alright, cool off", giving them a 7 day ban is more like "You really aren't welcome here."
Now sometimes the longer ban may be warranted, but I think the new system does so excessively. So what if you have a spam infraction every 2 months? The damage this does to the forum is minimal.
The forum is the sum of its posters. If TF wanted to have his own private little club to discuss things with Padma, Ainwood, and the other elite (Supermods) that's his prerogative. HOWEVER, he didn't, and instead he opened up his community to everyone, and a lot of people have joined, without which this forum WOULD NOT BE WHAT IT IS.
This forum exists BECAUSE of its posters.
Also, question to the moderating team: I've seen several comments from Ainwood, and LOTS of comments from the mods, but I haven't seen TF himself comment EVEN ONCE on this. I'm curious, does he even know about it, and has he approved it? Or is he just not on enough to care about what the mod team does with the ruleset?
Yeah, that's probably the case, I guess. But what if they do continue to break the rules despite the greater consequences? They will be permabanned reasonably quickly. Is that a good thing for the forum?
I guess my question is (and I don't know the answer, BTW); how do you reconcile establishing clear consequences for chronic rule breakers with the good of the forum when those chronic rule breakers are actually a net positive despite their chronic rule breaking?
@ Dommy - Think of the mods as Jesus and Moses. Not everyone is allowed on the mountain.
But that is largely true because they knew at the time that they could do so without consequences. Would they have behaved the same had they faced real consequences for doing so? I don't believe so.
ParadigmShifter
Random Nonsense Generator
You underestimate the power of /meh.
There is only so far some of us are willing to dial back on posting style before abandoning posting or accepting the bans that come for not further dialing back.
GhostWriter16
Deity
TBH, that would still be a "Mission Accomplished" to them.
Which, assuming the rules are reasonable, is fine, respect them or get out.
The thing is, I don't see a minor spam post that really could have been left alone and most mods would have left alone, but it JUST SO HAPPENED one mod didn't like it, yet it was TECHNICALLY a violation of the rules and so they have the right to infract it and choose to do so, should really be that big of a deal. Spam happens, it can get out of hand, but IMO you'd have to post a spam comment almost every day to have REAL detrimental effect.
Similar threads
