How many reported posts/moderated posts/infraction points do you have?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Reported Posts: 66
Moderated Posts: 26
Infraction Points: 6

all due to anti social types, no doubt

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Reported Posts: 66
Moderated Posts: 26
Infraction Points: 6

all due to anti social types, no doubt

That's it? After the day you went rogue on the Atlas board?

Hold it. You got the wrong guy.
I don't come off no banana boat.

What you talking crazy for?
I'm a political refugee here.

Whoever's giving you your information is taking you for a long ride.
You're thinking of someone else maybe.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Reported Posts: 66
Moderated Posts: 26
Infraction Points: 6

all due to anti social types, no doubt

You mean the reports all came from homosexuals?  I should think they are quite 'sociable' - and I thought that was one of your criticisms of them.  In fact they say they are 'social' with more partners in one night than you would be in your whole life.

It seems to me you're more anti-social, hiding out in some bleak exurb of Houston with loaded guns all round.

However thanks for sharing - your extremely low ratio of death-points to reported posts is interesting. 

In jmf's case, it's pretty much solely due to points expiring after 3 months.  He was way up there for a while.

define way up there...I think I maxed at around 42

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Reported Posts: 66
Moderated Posts: 26
Infraction Points: 6

all due to anti social types, no doubt

ok, since being in Boston, I'm now at 44 infraction points.   guess it could be worse, I could've gotten arrested in Boston, least I only got infracted.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

As of Thursday, April 28, 2011 - 6:30 pm CDT

Reported Posts: 12
Moderated Posts: 3
Infraction Points: 0

I had 4 infraction points, but they expired and rolled off my record.

dude, you have it backwards:  the idea is to use this forum to get your clown thrills so you dont rack up infraction points in real life 

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

bushie, what did u get infracted for?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

tell me again what happens at 50 points?  does mod review mean your post has to reviewed by a mod before it shows up?  and mod review only lasts 5 days?  and 100 points means youre banned?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

tell me again what happens at 50 points?  does mod review mean your post has to reviewed by a mod before it shows up?  and mod review only lasts 5 days?  and 100 points means youre banned?

You're close, I see.

eyes gots 44 (or is it 40...lost track).  the JCrew thread cost me 19 points, and I didnt even start the thread.  (dont know whose wife is going to get me banned first: Andrew's or mine.)But I had fun, though.

Boston has been to me like a magnet for infractions (i only had 6 when I arrived here).  Just something about being away from home that aint workin for me.  I got no furniture and got no car, I got no woman and there I are.

I should be able to redeem my frequent flyer miles for bonus infraction allowance.  Inks did spot me 3 the other day, though. (thanks, Inks) 

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

50 points = mod review
Yes
I'm not sure
No - you get muted for a week or 10 days.  But so far, that's never happened without a ban being instituded after the mute goes into effect.

100 points in 90 days would seem to be almost impossible to pull off, that's a JCrew-level flame-war every two weeks over a span of 3 months.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Other than Derek, 100 points has only ever been achieved when the mods mute somebody due to a spam attack or threat of a spam attack by a confirmed sock.

since you've opened the files.....define spam attack?  and how did Einzige (sp?) fall into that category (wasnt paying attention to him at the time)?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

more importantly, if banning means reaching the nearly impossible level of 100 points (ok, muted, then banned), what's the point in this whole infraction system???!!!

because, it seems like you're telling me that, except for spammers (which are obvious banable offenses, with or without an infraction system),  Derek is the only one who reached 100 points, and you had to invent a "too stupid to post" violation category especially for him.

so why even bother with the current system?  (rhetorical)

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

First, there was no violation category invented for Derek.

yeah, but wasnt he banned without actually violating the written TOS, simply because his views were not deemed logical and didnt represent any other known person on earth?

what I am saying is that these nickel and dime infractions dont amount to a hill of beans since getting 100 of them within 90 days is pretty much impossible.  and those who were banned were banned for obvious reasons which had nothing to do with crossing the threshold of 100 points.

i know it seems like I am whining now just because I am a stone's throw away from 50, but once my point total goes down - and it will go down - my argument is going to make a lot more sense - the infraction system is basically irrelevant to every poster, even to most of the ones who were banned (because they didnt reach 100 points), and it needlessly wastes the time of the moderators.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

No, that wasn't why he was banned.  And, while the point system may be pointless, it ultimately helps in deciding bannings.  If a poster is consistently at or around 50 points, they have a much higher chance of being banned than someone who never goes above 10.

I'm not so sure I like your tone, mister.  I'll be keeping an eye on you.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Reported Posts: 103
Moderated Posts: 42
Infraction Points: 53

now, hopefully mod review at 50 is a one time thingy.  because, I know it is hard to visualize, but I can see myself dropping slightly below 50 and then right back above it.  it would be a shame if I had to go through mod review each time

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Reported Posts: 103
Moderated Posts: 42
Infraction Points: 53

Reported Posts: 112 (+9)
Moderated Posts: 55 (+13)
Infraction Points: 91 (+38)

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Reported Posts: 112
Moderated Posts: 55
Infraction Points: 91

Well dude let's be honest you took the kamikaze route to mod-review.  But damn, man.

consider this, though:  my latest infraction spree (June 13-14th) brought my total from 48 to 73, but Nym90 went back on June 14th and infracted 11 older posts, the two newest of which were posted on May 17th (1pt infraction) and May 3rd (4 pt infraction), and another 13 points for 9 other posts that I wrote prior to May, bringing my total up to 91.

Which is why I claimed he was attempting to retroactively lynch me for posts over a month old.

Basically, within a span of 48 hours, my total went from 48 to 91....Needless to say, I find Nym90 a tad aggravating, especially for those last 18.  

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Reported Posts: 116
Moderated Posts: 58
Infraction Points: 100

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Reported Posts: 116
Moderated Posts: 58
Infraction Points: 100

I've already been reported:

Reported Posts: 117 (+1)
Moderated Posts: 58
Infraction Points: 100

there should be a new rule - reporters of posts (i.e. rats) should have to recommend the number of points the post should be infracted, and if the post doesnt warrant infraction, then the rat is the one who gets infracted by the amount he previously recommended.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

And I want to signal than calling reporters "rats" is a personal attack on them and is a violation of the ToS.

i think the person has to be specified in order for it to be a personal attack...no?....else terms like democRATS become infractionable?  give me a prudish break!

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Reported Posts: 116
Moderated Posts: 58
Infraction Points: 100

I've already been reported:

Reported Posts: 117 (+1)
Moderated Posts: 58
Infraction Points: 100

Reported Posts: 124 (+7)
Moderated Posts: 58
Infraction Points: 51 (-49!)

I guess my death points incurred within the JCrew thread must have rolled off...and my 10 death points for asking about Siberia should roll off in a week...pretty soon I'll be like a virgin forumite, but with an attitude of someone who has been gang raped.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

2/1/0, and I was complaining about Democrats attacking other Democrats.

they simply dont report you much, and certainly dont infact you at all, simply because you're a black.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

so, Christ lowered your death points by 9?...well he lowered mine by over 50 and he aint done yet

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

should we keep on trolling so that God's grace towards us may increase?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

bgwah,

just be glad Christ found me before I stumbled onto you

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]