New Feature Regarding Warnings, Mod Posting, and Banning

[Dave Leip]

Hi and Happy New Year!
I'm implementing a new tracking tool for reported posts and moderator actions.  Now, all reported posts ("Report to Moderator") are saved and the moderators report the type of action taken (deleted/modified or no action and reason).  This provides a record of the reports and actions taken.  If there are any concerns with moderator action, I can review any complaints. 

Furthermore, I'm also implementing a new framework based on reported posts.  The following is a guideline and can be modified subject to moderator inputs.

• At 3, 6, and 9 reported posts in which a moderator deletes or modifies the post, a warning is generated that sends a PM to the member showing the original posts that were moderated.
• 10 reported posts in which a moderator deletes or modifies the post will place the member on moderated posting for 5 days. 
• 15 reported posts in which a moderator deletes or modifies the post will place the member on moderated posting for an additional 10 days. 
• 20 reported posts in which a moderator deletes or modifies the post will ban the member.

Only posts with date stamps after this message count.

Reported posts in which the moderator takes no action do not count.

There is an avenue to appeal the count of mod actions by sending a PM to myself.

Types of posts that are deleted or modified: personal attacks, profanity/vulgarity, discrimination/hatefulness, trolling/baiting, spam.

Note that immediate ban or mod review can be implemented for more serious violations.  It is my hope that these changes will improve the posting quality, improve the consistency of actions, and make the forum a better place.

Thanks for your help,
Dave


Some Guidelines (will continue to add to this list)
Personal Attacks: Personal attacks include extraneous words in a post that demean the poster you are debating, such as I disagree, you "*$#" (fill in the blank) or "I'm not sure that you can comprehend this, but ..."  All personal attacks are deleted when reported.  Veiled or subtle attacks will also be deleted when reported. 

Profanity and Vulgarity: Please refrain from using profanity and vulgarity.  Such posts are subject to deletion or modification when reported.

Discrimination and Hateful Speech: Posts deemed to be discriminatory or hateful against other posters or groups in general due to race, religion, etc. are deleted when reported.

Empty Quoting: One empty quote can be considered agreement with the statement.  Although I prefer you add your own words, I'm ok with reasonable levels.  Empty quoting yourself to bump a thread or to try to reiterate your position is considered spam.

Bumping old threads: bumping a very old thread with little substance (especially with an empty quote) is considered spam.  You can revitalize an old thread if there is new information to discuss or new members whom would like to engage in quality discussions.

[Teddy (IDS Legislator)]

Hear hear!!

I hope that there are also time limits on this, so that its not, for example, 20 posts over 5 years. A one year limit on this sounds reasonable, 20 problem posts in a year means more than one a month.

Scratch all that. I'm not a big believer in lifetime bans. Perhaps after 20 posts the poster can take a 2 month holiday. After that, for each 5 posts, he can take 2 more. IMHO of course.

[Vasall des Midas]

Hi and Happy New Year!
I'm implementing a new tracking tool for reported posts and moderator actions.  Now, all reported posts ("Report to Moderator") are saved and the moderators report the type of action taken (deleted/modified or no action and reason).  This provides a record of the reports and actions taken.  If there are any concerns with moderator action, I can review any complaints.  

Good idea.

Furthermore, I'm also implementing a new framework based on reported posts.  The following is a guideline and can be modified subject to moderator inputs.
 5 reported posts in which a moderator deletes or modifies the post generate a warning that sends a PM to the member showing the original posts that were moderated.
10 reported posts in which a moderator deletes or modifies the post will place the member on moderated posting for 5 days.  
15 reported posts in which a moderator deletes or modifies the post will place the member on moderated posting for an additional 10 days.  
20 reported posts in which a moderator deletes or modifies the post will ban the member.

Way too drastic, I fear. Given that post modification is occasionally for formatting errors... and what happens when an entire thread is deleted for whatever reason?

[Senator Ben]

Way too drastic, I fear. Given that post modification is occasionally for formatting errors... and what happens when an entire thread is deleted for whatever reason?

I think it's at the discretion of the mod, and the banning will take that sort of thing into account.

[Dave Leip]

Only posts deleted or modified for personal attacks, profanity/vulgarity, discrimination, trolling/baiting, spam count towards the totals.  Reported posts for format issues, wrong board, etc. don't count.

Dave

[Vasall des Midas]

What about whole threads?

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

Dave,

A few questions:

1. Is there some sort of expiration for the reported posts?  (for example, if I have 20 posts reported, but it's over the span of the next 10 years, would I still get banned?)
2. Is the ban after 20 posts permanent, temporary, or at your discretion?
3. Sometimes we get some heated back-and-forth threads where people will post 10 posts worth of reportable content.  If a mod decides to just delete a whole thread, will that count as 10 strikes, or just 1?

Overall it looks like a good system - thanks for taking some action.

[Fmr. Emperor PiT]

     Yeah, I like the new feature, though I also think that it would be nice if someone wouldn't get banned for having 20 posts moderated over the course of 10 years.

[MasterJedi]

Hamilton and his crew are already trying to abuse it with people they don't like atm.

[Countess Anya of the North Parish]

Hamilton and his crew are already trying to abuse it with people they don't like atm.

really?

oh you should try to say hat is you do so many reports then I equals a certain amount of troll posts etc.

[MasterJedi]

Hamilton and his crew are already trying to abuse it with people they don't like atm.

really?

oh you should try to say hat is you do so many reports then I equals a certain amount of troll posts etc.

Uhm, sorry, I can't understand that.

[Countess Anya of the North Parish]

Hamilton and his crew are already trying to abuse it with people they don't like atm.

really?

oh you should try to say hat is you do so many reports then I equals a certain amount of troll posts etc.

Uhm, sorry, I can't understand that.

oh sorry.
All I am saying is that if you abuse the new feature then you should get a consequence.

[MasterJedi]

Hamilton and his crew are already trying to abuse it with people they don't like atm.

really?

oh you should try to say hat is you do so many reports then I equals a certain amount of troll posts etc.

Uhm, sorry, I can't understand that.

oh sorry.
All I am saying is that if you abuse the new feature then you should get a consequence.

Ah, ok. I gotcha, and I agree.

[Senator Ben]

Hamilton and his crew are already trying to abuse it with people they don't like atm.

Big shock there

[President Marokai]

Hamilton and his crew are already trying to abuse it with people they don't like atm.

Big shock there

Yeah this is hardly a surprise.

[Senator Ben]

I wish we could get a PM whenever one of our posts is reported, even if it doesn't say who reported it.

[President Marokai]

I fear this new system will be an abused disaster, honestly. You could find a sympathetic moderator to edit anything, if you're friendly with them enough and you report enough posts until something sticks.

Hamilton and his groupies are going to report the posts of almost anyone they collectively don't like even if the most is mildly offensive or not, and they're going to try and get moderators they're friendly with to go through with such things. There should've been some sort of stipulation in this new system that moderators all had to come to some sort of majority agreement over something, but instead, just one moderator has the power, if people abuse the report to moderator function enough, to be the executioner.

Quite alot of power and quite far in the direction we should not be taking, I think. I knew last night when some sort of rating system was being proposed that it would be abused and this will be abused all the same.

[Senator Ben]

Ultimate authority, though, rests with Dave, and he can make the final judgment.

Plus, I have enough faith in the moderators not to do anything too outrageous.

[President Marokai]

Ultimate authority, though, rests with Dave, and he can make the final judgment.

Plus, I have enough faith in the moderators not to do anything too outrageous.

True, but I would have alot more faith in this new system if it wasn't just left up to one moderator to trigger these punishments.

[Senator Ben]

True, but I would have alot more faith in this new system if it wasn't just left up to one moderator to trigger these punishments.

Yeah, same here.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

I wish we could get a PM whenever one of our posts is reported, even if it doesn't say who reported it.

Dave, is this something that could be done?

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

I fear this new system will be an abused disaster, honestly. You could find a sympathetic moderator to edit anything, if you're friendly with them enough and you report enough posts until something sticks.

I don't think there are any moderators sympathetic to Hamilton & Co.  I guess it could be abused in the future, but for the most part, I think our mods are very fair.

[Alexander Hamilton]

For the record, I reported posts using the word "retarded" in an unacceptable manner, as I always have, and one where ncy attacked someone viciously. MJ is a notorious liar and someone unworthy of being a mod, though, so I'm not surprised he would say something like that.

[Senator Libertas]

I fear this new system will be an abused disaster, honestly. You could find a sympathetic moderator to edit anything, if you're friendly with them enough and you report enough posts until something sticks.

I don't think there are any moderators sympathetic to Hamilton & Co.  I guess it could be abused in the future, but for the most part, I think our mods are very fair.

So the fact that the mods are heavily biased against "Hamilton & Co." makes them "very fair"?

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

I fear this new system will be an abused disaster, honestly. You could find a sympathetic moderator to edit anything, if you're friendly with them enough and you report enough posts until something sticks.

I don't think there are any moderators sympathetic to Hamilton & Co.  I guess it could be abused in the future, but for the most part, I think our mods are very fair.

So the fact that the mods are heavily biased against "Hamilton & Co." makes them "very fair"?

"Not being sympathetic to" does not equal "heavily biased against".