Permabanning points system or something?

strobe

Hey I was just wondering how you decide to permaban someone from the site? I've noticed a few long time posters over the last while in the prison forum that were banned for clocking up X(?) number of bans/infractions over the course of their time here. It seem to come a bit out of the blue (from their point of view). So what's the deal there? Do you have a points system whereby a ban = 6 points, a red card = 4 points etc and once some hits 31 points or something you permaban them?

How's that work? Is the nature of the infractions and/or bans taken into account? I mean if someone has 3 bans for calling someone a cvnt is that worse than having three bans (in terms of eventually getting permabanned) than having three bans for something other than personal abuse? Is the frequency of the bans/infractions a factor? Like, if someone gets X bans in two years is that considered worse or equivalent to someone getting X bans over 5 years?

I mean there is a lad there in Prison now who has ~7000 posts and posting since 2006 and he seemed a but blind sided by the ban. Maybe some kind of automated warning for people that have racked up a certain amount of bans/infractions/points or however you work it would be a good idea saying "Warning you have accumulated X Y's in Z amount of time. Stop acting the maggot or you are gone pal" would be a good idea? Rather than just landing on them one day flash bang style.

Thoughts?

FlutterinBantam

strobe wrote: »

Hey I was just wondering how you decide to permaban someone from the site? I've noticed a few long time posters over the last while in the prison forum that were banned for clocking up X(?) number of bans/infractions over the course of their time here. It seem to come a bit out of the blue (from their point of view). So what's the deal there? Do you have a points system whereby a ban = 6 points, a red card = 4 points etc and once some hits 31 points or something you permaban them?

How's that work? Is the nature of the infractions and/or bans taken into account? I mean if someone has 3 bans for calling someone a cvnt is that worse than having three bans (in terms of eventually getting permabanned) than having three bans for something other than personal abuse? Is the frequency of the bans/infractions a factor? Like, if someone gets X bans in two years is that considered worse or equivalent to someone getting X bans over 5 years?

I mean there is a lad there in Prison now who has ~7000 posts and posting since 2006 and he seemed a but blind sided by the ban. Maybe some kind of automated warning for people that have racked up a certain amount of bans/infractions/points or however you work it would be a good idea saying "Warning you have accumulated X Y's in Z amount of time. Stop acting the maggot or you are gone pal" would be a good idea? Rather than just landing on them one day flash bang style.

Thoughts?

Been there pal, got a perma from AH from some newbie Mod.

Had a bit of 'form' in fairness.

No warning, no nothing,so my advice is to just post things like "Love that post man" "great post, I agree completely" or "Fantastic! of course we should pay for all this"

You will get up to 50,000 posts no problem:D

LoLth

The idea of the infractions and forum/category bans are to show the user where they are going wrong. Thats their warning. If, after a period of time the user is obviously not "getting it" or is deliberately being troublesome but not enough to warrant a straight out site ban, we do take their history into account.

A user that gets a string of infractions and minor bans from a range of forums for insulting other users over a period of a year or so for example just isnt getting the message that that behaviour is not acceptable. eventually we just have to decide that enough chances have been given and htat keepign the user around not only creates more work for the mods/cmods and admins as we try to get them to see the light, it also detracts from the enjoyment of other users. The site is better off without their input.

There is no hard and fast formula for when the scales finally tip. A point based system would remove the human element from the process and you need that element to make exceptions and take context and circumstances into account. So, its a manual process. If a user turn up on our radar, we always look at their posting history. If that raises an eyebrow, the admin can ask for a second opinion on borderline cases or impose the siteban for the obvious ones (the ones who have had "form" ).

At some stage, even just for sanity's sake, we have to say enough is enough and its not us, its you.

and no, you dont have to agree with every post or even praise boards.ie in all that you do. you just have to know how to disagree properly and not resort to being a dick when some anonymous internet person dares to disagree.

FlutterinBantam

LoLth wrote: »

The idea of the infractions and forum/category bans are to show the user where they are going wrong. Thats their warning. If, after a period of time the user is obviously not "getting it" or is deliberately being troublesome but not enough to warrant a straight out site ban, we do take their history into account.

A user that gets a string of infractions and minor bans from a range of forums for insulting other users over a period of a year or so for example just isnt getting the message that that behaviour is not acceptable. eventually we just have to decide that enough chances have been given and htat keepign the user around not only creates more work for the mods/cmods and admins as we try to get them to see the light, it also detracts from the enjoyment of other users. The site is better off without their input.

There is no hard and fast formula for when the scales finally tip. A point based system would remove the human element from the process and you need that element to make exceptions and take context and circumstances into account. So, its a manual process. If a user turn up on our radar, we always look at their posting history. If that raises an eyebrow, the admin can ask for a second opinion on borderline cases or impose the siteban for the obvious ones (the ones who have had "form" ).

At some stage, even just for sanity's sake, we have to say enough is enough and its not us, its you.

and no, you dont have to agree with every post or even praise boards.ie in all that you do. you just have to know how to disagree properly and not resort to being a dick when some anonymous internet person dares to disagree.

:eek:

strobe

LoLth wrote: »

The idea of the infractions and forum/category bans are to show the user where they are going wrong. Thats their warning. If, after a period of time the user is obviously not "getting it" or is deliberately being troublesome but not enough to warrant a straight out site ban, we do take their history into account.

A user that gets a string of infractions and minor bans from a range of forums for insulting other users over a period of a year or so for example just isnt getting the message that that behaviour is not acceptable. eventually we just have to decide that enough chances have been given and htat keepign the user around not only creates more work for the mods/cmods and admins as we try to get them to see the light, it also detracts from the enjoyment of other users. The site is better off without their input.

There is no hard and fast formula for when the scales finally tip. A point based system would remove the human element from the process and you need that element to make exceptions and take context and circumstances into account. So, its a manual process. If a user turn up on our radar, we always look at their posting history. If that raises an eyebrow, the admin can ask for a second opinion on borderline cases or impose the siteban for the obvious ones (the ones who have had "form" ).

At some stage, even just for sanity's sake, we have to say enough is enough and its not us, its you.

and no, you dont have to agree with every post or even praise boards.ie in all that you do. you just have to know how to disagree properly and not resort to being a dick when some anonymous internet person dares to disagree.

Yeah that all sounds fair enough I guess. I still think actually making a point of telling someone "this is your last chance to turn your ways around" or something prior to implementing an absolutely irreversible ban would be a good idea rather than hoping the infractions etc click for them at a certain point. Everyone deserves one last chance and all that. If after that they still act the bollix then they have no right to feel hard done by as they clearly knew what the result would be. Just think the out of the blue aspect of it seems a bit harsh.

Odaise Gaelach

I can see where you're coming from, but one would hope that a poster gets the idea after the first ban.

It'd very difficult to determine what would be the fixed limit, and having one would proabably only encourage more posters to "see how far they can push it" instead of the staff dealing each poster on a case-by-case basis, which is what they do now (I believe).

And from what I can see in various DRP and Prison threads a lot of the staff are quite patient with how many bans a poster can accumulate before handing out a siteban.

strobe

Odaise Gaelach wrote: »

I can see where you're coming from, but one would hope that a poster gets the idea after the first ban.

It'd very difficult to determine what would be the fixed limit, and having one would proabably only encourage more posters to "see how far they can push it" instead of the staff dealing each poster on a case-by-case basis, which is what they do now (I believe).

And from what I can see in various DRP and Prison threads a lot of the staff are quite patient with how many bans a poster can accumulate before handing out a siteban.

I'm not even really suggesting a fixed limit though. Just that at the point they reach the decision (however they reach it) to permaban, well, one degree before that, say to someone "you are on thin ice here, unless your attitude towards the rules changes is a big way you are gone permanently next ban, no discussion" or something to that effect. Like how a court can issue a suspended sentence, tell them they are now on a 'suspended permanent site ban' that will be activated for any serious future transgressions.

Just thought I'd throw it out there for consideration.

FlutterinBantam

strobe wrote: »

I'm not even really suggesting a fixed limit though. Just that at the point they reach the decision (however they reach it) to permaban, well, one degree before that, say to someone "you are on thin ice here, unless your attitude towards the rules changes is a big way you are gone permanently next ban, no discussion" or something to that effect. Like how a court can issue a suspended sentence, tell them they are now on a 'suspended permanent site ban' that will be activated for any serious future transgressions.

Just thought I'd throw it out there for consideration.

yes, I would agree with that.

Ickle Magoo

strobe wrote: »

I'm not even really suggesting a fixed limit though. Just that at the point they reach the decision (however they reach it) to permaban, well, one degree before that, say to someone "you are on thin ice here, unless your attitude towards the rules changes is a big way you are gone permanently next ban, no discussion" or something to that effect. Like how a court can issue a suspended sentence, tell them they are now on a 'suspended permanent site ban' that will be activated for any serious future transgressions.

Just thought I'd throw it out there for consideration.

At what point during the amassing of multiple warnings, infractions and bans can a poster not know they are on thin ice? Surely multiple on-thread warnings, yellows, reds and temp bans is already shouting loud and clear that a poster must change their posting style or they risk a longer and more permanent solution to their disrupting the forum/site for others?

There are posters who have been posting on Boards for years who haven't picked up as much as an on-thread warning and cause zero crap for the mods/admins to clean up. How do you justify even more explicit hand-holding than the collection of warnings & ban systems already in place for those who are seemingly incapable of doing likewise? Surely the onus should be on posters to read rules and not insist on being a dick rather than on mods/admins to try every avenue to save chronic problem posters from themselves...?

strobe

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

At what point during the amassing of multiple warnings, infractions and bans can a poster not know they are on thin ice? Surely multiple on-thread warnings, yellows, reds and temp bans is already shouting loud and clear that a poster must change their posting style or they risk a longer and more permanent solution to their disrupting the forum/site for others?

There are posters who have been posting on Boards for years who haven't picked up as much as an on-thread warning and cause zero crap for the mods/admins to clean up. How do you justify even more explicit hand-holding than the collection of warnings & ban systems already in place for those who are seemingly incapable of doing likewise? Surely the onus should be on posters to read rules and not insist on being a dick rather than on mods/admins to try every avenue to save chronic problem posters from themselves...?

Well no, clearly the bans and things don't automatically let a person know that they are on thin ice. A lot of people wouldn't even be aware that an accumulated amount of bans = a permanent site ban, or where the line lies. It never references anything like that in the ban messages (I think). I just don't see the difficulty with giving someone a heads up and drawing their attention to the fact that they are accumulating a disproportionate amount of infractions and things. Surely if this results in a poster who makes a lot of helpful and good posts along with their not so helpful ones changing their ways and continuing to post but in a much better way then that is better than just telling them to get lost?

Like in the reference to suspended sentences above, most people would agree that if they do actually convince someone who has been committing minor offenses but also contributing positively to society to mend their ways then that would be better than just dropping a life sentence on someone that they weren't aware was coming?

==========
==========

As Paul Fitzgerald said on the decision to sentence Patricia Krenwinkle to the death penalty, “I fail to see how it helps anything—this country, this society. The community that kills its problem children denies itself the access to insights, solutions.”

(Is there a prize for the most out of left field reference of the day?) :pac:

Pace2008

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

No warning, no nothing,so my advice is to just post things like "Love that post man" "great post, I agree completely" or "Fantastic! of course we should pay for all this"

Maybe even try to lose the incessantly insulting tone or have the manners to reciprocate when someone attmepts to debate you on any menaingful level. Just some crazy ideas I'm throwing out there.

Ickle Magoo

strobe wrote:

(Is there a prize for the most out of left field reference of the day?)

It beats Nah, I guess.

strobe wrote:

Well no, clearly the bans and things don't automatically let a person know that they are on thin ice.

I disagree, strobe. They do automatically for many - the issue of permabanning is only relevant to a tiny proportion of posters who have failed to grasp the basics long after everyone else has. The consequences of multiple bans/infractions are given in the FAQ section and for anyone who chooses not to read them, the infraction PMs state in them:

Infractions are a reminder to you that you have broken a rule, but not in a serious way. The rules for every forum can be seen in the Forum Charter which appears at the top of every forum. If you are unsure what rule you have broken or how, please PM the Moderator(s) of the forum and ask them. All forums are moderated differently, so if you made a similar comment on one forum, it doesn't necessarily mean it's ok to post it everywhere else. Remember that our Mods are volunteers and are not always online, so they may not be able to answer you straight away.

This infraction is worth 1 point(s). Earning 9 active infraction points results in an automatic site ban until at least one of them expires (Infractions are active for 10 days) - this is there as a means to keep serious trouble makers or spammers off the site.

and ban PM's state:

Providing your ban is not permanent, it will be lifted automatically after Permanent. You will get an automatic message informing you that the ban is lifted. If you do not receive this message after the allotted time, please PM a moderator to clarify.

Bans occur after a serious rules breach so please keep in mind that Moderators don't just decide to ban people out of the blue. If you wish to appeal this ban, please follow our Dispute Resolution Process here. Your first action should always be to PM the Moderator(s) of the forum to discuss the ban. Remember that our Mods are volunteers and are not always online, so they may not be able to answer you straight away.

So I'm not sure how anyone could fail to understand what the consequences of continuing to rack up infractions and bans is going to be? Unless they choose to ignore it being spelt out and personally delivered to them.

This discussion is really how much effort the site should go to, to accommodate posters who continuously and deliberately disregard rules they are linked to and warned about in every warning/infraction/ban they pick up. Even ignoring the PM's, anyone who has been around long enough to accumulate multiple warnings, infractions and bans is also aware of how Boards operates - that they chose to act in a manner that means their contributions are of less worth than the effort of managing their deliberate transgressions is ultimately their choice...for most posters sweating about whether they've tipped the scales in favour of a permaban is never even a consideration.

I have to say I'm not a great fan of hand-holding and bending over backwards to make life easier for posters who repeatedly choose not to make the same effort for the site and it's other posters.

strobe

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

It beats Nah, I guess.

I disagree, strobe. [....] other posters.

Well neither of those messages state that a permanent site ban will be innacted at some stage without a warning (I know you say the ban/infractions are the warning but not everyone is aware of that, demonstrability so).

Anyway, like I say I just thought it would be a good idea rather than just springing it on people.

Just think it's better not to lose posters that do make a positive contribution as well when it might not be necessary. Better for them, better for other posters that benefit from the good posts that they do make, better for boards.ie and their associates. Win-win-win all round.

Anyway, I'm off out. I submit the above for the consideration of those assembled etc.

Dudess

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Been there pal, got a perma from AH from some newbie Mod.

But still a mod.

No warning, no nothing

Sure... :rolleyes:
God, you're even pretending to be a victim now...

so my advice is to just post things like "Love that post man" "great post, I agree completely" or "Fantastic! of course we should pay for all this"

You will get up to 50,000 posts no problem:D

And again with the passive-aggressive tripe, yet still the "bemusement" at the mods being mean to you. You always post stuff like "Love that post" and "Great post, I agree completely" and "Fantastic!" to a nauseating level... when it's something you agree with/by someone you like (even if they just post "Purplemonkeydishwasher").
Maybe it's not getting through to you: It ain't what you post, it's the way that you post it.

LoLth wrote: »

and no, you dont have to agree with every post or even praise boards.ie in all that you do. you just have to know how to disagree properly and not resort to being a dick when some anonymous internet person dares to disagree.

Ickle Magoo

strobe wrote: »

Well neither of those messages state that a permanent site ban will be innacted at some stage without a warning.

Anyway, like I say I just thought it would be a good idea rather than just springing it on people.

Just think it's better not to lose posters that do make a positive contribution as well when it might not be necessary. Better for them, for other posters that benefit from the good posts that they do make, better for boards.ie and their associates. Win-win-win all round.

Providing your ban is not permanent

would certainly suggest to me that permanent bans both exist and can be handed out for similar. Charters often state as much as well, I know the PI charter states that infractions/bans are accumulative and can result in a permaban...

At some stage posters have to take personal responsibility for what they post or the state they post in and accept that their worthwhileness (not sure if that's actually a word but you know what I mean) is being severely compromised by their inability to stay within the rules - and it's something only they can choose to change...it shouldn't be that the rest of the community is punished in order to save a poster who only respect a certain forum or certain posters...either they want to be a poster on the site, or they don't.

FlutterinBantam

Pace2008 wrote: »

Maybe even try to lose the incessantly insulting tone or have the manners to reciprocate when someone attmepts to debate you on any menaingful level. Just some crazy ideas I'm throwing out there.

Your perception, my friend, your perception.

I note that you tried to ram some fairly off the wall issues down my throat back awhile.

Sorry, we all don't think like you, and won't fall into line like goats.


Forgive me if I didn't put too much credence in them:cool:

Dudess

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Your perception, my friend, your perception.

Nope. There's perception and there's reality - this one's reality. Surely you're not denying what Pace says is true?

I note that you tried to ram some fairly off the wall issues down my throat back awhile.

Oh he said stuff you didn't agree with was it?

Sorry, we all don't think like you, and won't fall into line like goats. Forgive me if I didn't put too much credence in them:cool:

Again, simply because you don't agree with them/they don't agree with you - even if they put across their points really well. Even agreeing with something you disagree with = "falling into line like goats" in your world. By that logic, someone agreeing with YOU is also falling into line like goats...

It's actually laugable - disliking someone and then harassing them and pretending they have an agenda and exaggerating what they say, simply because they disagree with you/you disagree with them, is the stuff of children. Bless.

Pace2008

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Your perception, my friend, your perception.

I note that you tried to ram some fairly off the wall issues down my throat back awhile.

Sorry, we all don't think like you, and won't fall into line like goats.


Forgive me if I didn't put too much credence in them:cool:

I don't give a **** whether you agree with me or not.

I'd be thinking more along the lines of , say, the constant use of faux-pleasantries (you're doing it right now, by the way) which would be widely construed as being rude.

People disagree with each other all the time; It's the very nature of discussion fora. Funnily enough, 99% of these people don't end up getting banned by virtue of the fact they wouldn't accept each others' point of view.

Pace2008

Oh, and Strobe's suggestion seems pretty reasonable to me.

Zaph

strobe wrote: »

I'm not even really suggesting a fixed limit though. Just that at the point they reach the decision (however they reach it) to permaban, well, one degree before that, say to someone "you are on thin ice here, unless your attitude towards the rules changes is a big way you are gone permanently next ban, no discussion" or something to that effect. Like how a court can issue a suspended sentence, tell them they are now on a 'suspended permanent site ban' that will be activated for any serious future transgressions.

Just thought I'd throw it out there for consideration.

In many of these cases the person has already had one or more temporary sitebans and they haven't solved the problem. Personally I'd have thought that a temporary siteban would be enough of a warning, but it seems not and some people just can't help being asshats.

strobe

Zaph wrote: »

In many of these cases the person has already had one or more temporary sitebans and they haven't solved the problem. Personally I'd have thought that a temporary siteban would be enough of a warning, but it seems not and some people just can't help being asshats.

Ah yeah, I'd actually forgotten about temp sitebans. Well as long as a temp site ban comes first I think that's reasonable enough.

But maybe, for like super clarity or something, include in the wording of the message that accompanies the ban something about a permanent ban being on the horizon.

Whether it's a site ban or a forum ban, if it's going to be permanent and unappealable, I just think making it clear that a permanent unappealable ban is close if things continue as they are would benefit both the site and the posters more than a shoot to kill policy. I don't think it's 'hand holding' or bending over backwards, it's just, ye know, being cool. Be cool.

Overheal

strobe wrote: »

As Paul Fitzgerald said on the decision to sentence Patricia Krenwinkle to the death penalty, “I fail to see how it helps anything—this country, this society. The community that kills its problem children denies itself the access to insights, solutions.”

In all fairness I've seen some people with really colorful histories that were abrasive posters skirt the line before. Boards is actually more than fair about what point it considers someone more of a problem than they are worth. If you're a good contributor that has infractions/bans those contributions can weigh in your favor but sometimes it's just not enough to outweigh the headache involved in accommodating the individual.

starbelgrade

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Your perception, my friend, your perception.

Your perception - or lack of it in this case - is exactly the reason why you got yourself permabanned from After Hours.

Dudess

Oh no, Star - it was them being mean.

strobe wrote: »

I mean there is a lad there in Prison now who has ~7000 posts and posting since 2006 and he seemed a but blind sided by the ban.

If it's the person I think it is, the only surprising thing is that they weren't banned years ago - Stormfront will welcome them with open arms for sure.

FlutterinBantam

Dudess wrote: »

Oh no, Star - it was them, not him.

Hmmm. ....sense a lot of negative vibes here Dudess.

Let's put it up for grabs shall we?

I say it as it is, no decoration, or malleable border, no bating around the bush or couching in diplomatic terms...M'kay

My point of view seems to go against the grain of most of the Boards.ie contributors , who seem to be , in the main, IT students who never paid a red ...sorry... green cent tax in their lives.

I don't take their views too seriously, so forgive me if I seem a tad practical in all this little kerfuffle.

Just deal with the arguments, don't attack the poster.


Tag teams don't mean nothing to me babes.

Dudess

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I say it as it is, no decoration, or malleable border, no bating around the bush or couching in diplomatic terms...M'kay

Your use of stuff like "M'kay", "pal", "buddy", "my friend" and the various smileys in a passive aggressive fashion is snide - and you know it, but pretend to be innocent.
You contribute your point of view. You rarely back it up - you just throw out the same tired soundbites, generalisations and presumptions over and over. You then attack and ridicule people who do a much better job of putting across arguments than you do, simply for not agreeing with you. That is not "saying it as it is" and all the other stuff you say above. That's mean-spirited and obnoxious. It is borderline harassment at times also.

My point of view seems to go against the grain of most of the Boards.ie contributors , who seem to be , in the main, IT students who never paid a red ...sorry... green cent tax in their lives.

I actually share some of your views re privileged kids pontificating about various causes, but you apply it to anyone at all who disagrees with you, rather than taking on board the individual argument. Then you pretend you're a lone voice, a renegade railing against the culture of Boards. There are plenty who spout out the same stuff as you, and in the same unsupported fashion.

I don't take their views too seriously, so forgive me if I seem a tad practical in all this little kerfuffle.

Riling people isn't being practical.

Just deal with the arguments, don't attack the poster.

Something that could have been written for you.

Tag teams don't mean nothing to me babes.

There's no tag team - it's all in your head. Just because lots of people dislike how you rile people and ridicule people for disagreeing with you doesn't mean your views are being used against you. If you put them across in a reasonable fashion, ya wouldn't be permabanned.

FlutterinBantam

:eek:

That's a lot of bile for sure.:eek:

Can't figure out where all this hate came from.Not justified in my opinion.

Look , I'll take a raincheck, the Packers are on the box at 2115 and I have to watch them.

I'll absorb the hate in the meantime and I will study your post to see if I can in someway justify my stance .

Eh... have a good day.

strobe

Well, this wasn't supposed to be the "What's everyone's opinion of FlutterinBantam?" thread and as that's the direction it's going in it might be best just to lock her up.

Thanks for the on topic responses from people though.

strobe

Dudess wrote: »

If it's the person I think it is, the only surprising thing is that they weren't banned years ago - Stormfront will welcome them with open arms for sure.

I'm not aware of how they usually post, just noticed the kick ass username before.

Zaph

Dudess and Flutt, if you two want to continue scoring points against each other please take it to PM and stop derailing this thread. Thanks.

Bottle_of_Smoke

People seem to only get permabanned from the site for really taking the piss. Always multiple forum bans and even forum permabans.

Surely it would be very simple, to at the end of the standard text in a ban PM; include the line:

"Permanent sitebans can be administered to troublesome posters at discretion of site moderators, at any time"