RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes

FreelanceWizard · **04-30-2015, 08:41 AM**

Regarding the 20 point rule, that's 20 points accumulated in one year, not active points. With that said, if you hit 20 active points, you'll be banned permanently anyway under the "escalating bans at 10 points" rule. As I've said, we may adjust that number depending on how things go, and certainly I'm going to talk to someone who's getting close to that number. The point of the rule is to catch people who take advantage of the "free two strikes" inherent in the system to regularly show up and cause problems, not to punish people who screw up now and then -- though I'm fairly confident that the 20 point rule gives a pretty clear view on a pattern of behavior. Think of it like points on a driver's license. Sure, getting caught running a red light isn't going to get your license revoked, but if you repeatedly do it, it establishes a pattern of behavior that the State sees as dangerous enough to warrant a more serious punishment.

With that in mind, to Mae's point, we're generally not going to take advantage of heated threads to lay into people with warnings. That's not really productive and it's not exactly fair. Our job is to cool those threads down before it gets to that point, and if things are going really off the rails, we have lock, split, and remove tools to that end. I'm also working on a way to set a thread to have posting limits or post review so we have a tool that's lighter than a lock, but more stringent than a "hey, calm down" post.

Regarding removing warnings, the same appeals process exists as always: PM me with what happened and we'll talk about it. I can lift bans, reverse warnings, and make exemptions. Also, note that mods can send a "hey, be careful" PM instead of a formal warning in the case where they feel there was no bad faith.

Regarding examples, PM me and we can go through a thread if you'd like. We're discussing making the warnings public in a thread; it's a touchy issue, with good points on both sides.

Kage · **04-30-2015, 09:13 AM**

(04-30-2015, 02:10 AM)ArmachiA Wrote: On the rest of it. Honestly, it sounds fine to me? Users with regular behavior of being disruptive is something all forums face and is something all forums need to handle. I am curious on what exactly is going to get the smack down, and as much as I would like to I certainly can't ask you to bring an old thread as an example that got closed and say who would get in trouble under the new warning so I have an understanding...

or can I? <,<

I'm perfectly fine with this as well. >.> I'd love to see an old thread get dissected for the content? and/or tone of the posts. I'm not sure how hard or easy it would be to do so over PMs for multiple people...? I just figured an example made to all would be easier.

I mean the thing is, if you've accumulated so much to have made a pattern of being a disruptive presence enough to have reached a certain number, I would think you would see that there's a problem that needs addressing.

On the subject of warnings being public, I'd happily see that as well. I don't view it so much as shaming the one person or post, but it's really telling people "Hey everyone, watch it/this. This is the type of behavior we [trying to be all-inclusive] want to curb." I've wanted to suggest it earlier but I know some people do see it as shaming. I disagree with that but as it's come up I want to voice my support for it.

Melodia · **04-30-2015, 09:40 AM**

(04-30-2015, 09:13 AM)Kage Wrote: I'd love to see an old thread get dissected for the content? and/or tone of the posts. I'm not sure how hard or easy it would be to do so over PMs for multiple people...? I just figured an example made to all would be easier.

As someone who's been warned and been surly (hoping I've been good lately Blush

) IÂ also would love to see an example just to understand where that line is.

Kage · **04-30-2015, 09:43 AM**

(04-30-2015, 09:40 AM)Melodia Wrote:
(04-30-2015, 09:13 AM)Kage Wrote: I'd love to see an old thread get dissected for the content? and/or tone of the posts. I'm not sure how hard or easy it would be to do so over PMs for multiple people...? I just figured an example made to all would be easier.
As someone who's been warned and been surly (hoping I've been good lately IÂ also would love to see an example just to understand where that line is.

<,< I was almost banned? >.>; In fact, iirc, I was supposed to have been but I didn't even know it was such a bad thing.

On reflection, I really should have just PM'd a mod to delete the thread. It wasn't about being ashamed of what I'd said or posted but that I saw it as a useless thread taking up space that had lost its purpose.

Khadan · **04-30-2015, 01:47 PM**

(04-30-2015, 08:41 AM)FreelanceWizard Wrote: Regarding the 20 point rule, that's 20 points accumulated in one year, not active points. With that said, if you hit 20 active points, you'll be banned permanently anyway under the "escalating bans at 10 points" rule. As I've said, we may adjust that number depending on how things go, and certainly I'm going to talk to someone who's getting close to that number. The point of the rule is to catch people who take advantage of the "free two strikes" inherent in the system to regularly show up and cause problems, not to punish people who screw up now and then -- though I'm fairly confident that the 20 point rule gives a pretty clear view on a pattern of behavior. Think of it like points on a driver's license. Sure, getting caught running a red light isn't going to get your license revoked, but if you repeatedly do it, it establishes a pattern of behavior that the State sees as dangerous enough to warrant a more serious punishment.

With that in mind, to Mae's point, we're generally not going to take advantage of heated threads to lay into people with warnings. That's not really productive and it's not exactly fair. Our job is to cool those threads down before it gets to that point, and if things are going really off the rails, we have lock, split, and remove tools to that end. I'm also working on a way to set a thread to have posting limits or post review so we have a tool that's lighter than a lock, but more stringent than a "hey, calm down" post.

Regarding removing warnings, the same appeals process exists as always: PM me with what happened and we'll talk about it. I can lift bans, reverse warnings, and make exemptions. Also, note that mods can send a "hey, be careful" PM instead of a formal warning in the case where they feel there was no bad faith.

Regarding examples, PM me and we can go through a thread if you'd like. We're discussing making the warnings public in a thread; it's a touchy issue, with good points on both sides.

So just to reiterate since I didn't see it in my quick scan by of the first post this morning. Do your 'warning points' in the scope of the big 20 ever fall off like they're supposed to, right now? I.e. 2 weeks and your warning percentage goes down etc? Or is getting a black mark on your record, no matter what the offense was, damning for life? To continue your example with the DMV, the 'strikes' on your driving record don't count against you forever! =P

McBeefâ„¢ · **04-30-2015, 02:22 PM**

(04-30-2015, 01:47 PM)Kayllen Wrote: So just to reiterate since I didn't see it in my quick scan by of the first post this morning. Do your 'warning points' in the scope of the big 20 ever fall off like they're supposed to, right now? I.e. 2 weeks and your warning percentage goes down etc? Or is getting a black mark on your record, no matter what the offense was, damning for life? To continue your example with the DMV, the 'strikes' on your driving record don't count against you forever! =P

Also driving record violations are for clear and measurable actions that harm the safety of others.

I just don't like the idea of being permanently banned because I might speak my mind too freely. Obviously, its not my decision, I can't change it, but I still do not like it.

I think dissension is healthy for a community, and I don't like permanent penalties placed on users who dissent.

That's just the long and short of it. Communities without some level of conflict end up stagnating into circlejerks and hugboxes. The trick is managing that conflict, to keep it from spiraling out of control, but also allow members to feel like they are not being censored.

I think sometimes inflammatory points need to be made, points that there is no nice way of stating. I think it's fine to give warnings to make people think twice about making those points, but I think is harmful to punish them too severely.

Fox · **04-30-2015, 02:30 PM**

* as a note phone makes my font massive so I apologize if it isn't fixed with bbcode.

There's a difference between someone shaking things up or disagreeing with other people and someone continuously insulting others and treating people badly. It gets old and it turns people off from involving themselves and eventually it becomes an echo box in threads.

Dissent is fine to an extent, if it becomes excessive it needs consequence.

Abridged situation since im on mobile; I was in a guild once, different game where a guy was very sexist, very creepy and I told the GM often to be careful with it. He agreed but this continued for months, the creepy dude was argumentive as well, caused a lot of problems. He was told to stop, didnt. And was told to leave. Later he was let back for benefit of doubt and the same behavior continued.

He was completely kicked and has done nothing but spread bs in that community about the guild. No one believes him but that sort of behavior doesn't correct itself.

And that is the sort of behavior which the mods I believe are meaning here. The consistent creates problems sort of person. Not someone who likes to rock the boat sonetimes.

FreelanceWizard · **04-30-2015, 02:31 PM**

The 20 point limit is on a yearly basis -- calendar year, in fact, but we're not retroactively bringing things in from before the end of April. At the end of the year, that count resets. So, right now, unless someone's been warned that I don't know about, everyone is at zero.

Natalie, there's nothing wrong with making inflammatory points. The problem is when you make the inflammatory point and also decide to be a jerk about it. I don't think having people pick fights and generally be unpleasant now and then is a good thing. It makes work for the mods and it generally bothers everyone. The enforcement policies have nothing to do with squelching dissent and everything to with ensuring that dissenting voices keep a reasonable volume.

The permanent penalties are not to eliminate those who dissent. They're to eliminate those who repeatedly demonstrate that their opinions, ideas, and lulz are more important than the community as a whole and the rules we all abide by.

EDIT: Oh, I've gotten a couple of PMs asking for examples. I'm looking for some good ones and will get back to you in the near future.

Nebbs · **04-30-2015, 02:32 PM**

Two things.. apologies if they were answered but I can't read all the posts to check.

1. Will there be an adjustment period for people to understand what has changed and how that affects the current accepted posting styles? I would recommend a month.

2. Otherwise.. Can we assume if we have not had any warnings so far that our behaviour is fine?

FreelanceWizard · **04-30-2015, 02:36 PM**

(04-30-2015, 02:32 PM)Nebbs Wrote: 1. Will there be an adjustment period for people to understand what has changed and how that affects the current accepted posting styles? I would recommend a month.

2. Otherwise.. Can we assume if we have not had any warnings so far that our behaviour is fine?

1. Since the rules have not really changed (we're just going to be enforcing the ones we have more effectively), we're not really going to offer any kind of adjustment period. However, like I said, we're going to give people the benefit of the doubt and use a lot of the "PM notification" instead of formal warnings, particularly where there's been confusion in the past.

2. If you haven't gotten warnings or had posts removed, then yes, you can assume you won't have any issues under the new policies.

McBeefâ„¢ · **04-30-2015, 02:39 PM**

(04-30-2015, 02:31 PM)FreelanceWizard Wrote: The permanent penalties are not to eliminate those who dissent. They're to eliminate those who repeatedly demonstrate that their opinions, ideas, and lulz are more important than the community as a whole and the rules we all abide by.

Ok Freelance, I'll trust that this is true.

I'm not planning to change my behavior based on these new policies, I'll probably still get some warnings now and again, but thinking back, I'd have to work really hard to get 20 in a year.

I still don't like it on some level, but I get what you're saying and I trust in the ability of you and the other mods to make those decisions.

Nebbs · **04-30-2015, 02:39 PM**

(04-30-2015, 02:36 PM)FreelanceWizard Wrote:
(04-30-2015, 02:32 PM)Nebbs Wrote: 1. Will there be an adjustment period for people to understand what has changed and how that affects the current accepted posting styles? I would recommend a month.

2. Otherwise.. Can we assume if we have not had any warnings so far that our behaviour is fine?

1. Since the rules have not really changed (we're just going to be enforcing the ones we have more effectively), we're not really going to offer any kind of adjustment period. However, like I said, we're going to give people the benefit of the doubt and use a lot of the "PM notification" instead of formal warnings, particularly where there's been confusion in the past.

2. If you haven't gotten warnings or had posts removed, then yes, you can assume you won't have any issues under the new policies.

Phew.. was panicking there .. thanks *hugs*Â Heart

Â Â

It all sounds fine, and you moderators really have a job cut out.. *leaves cake*

Khadan · **04-30-2015, 02:42 PM**

So everyone's getting a blanket reset as of the induction of this ruleset? I suppose if that's the case then a clean slate is fair. That and anyone who has a history of naughtiness will likely climb the ladder pretty fast, lol.

FreelanceWizard · **04-30-2015, 02:45 PM**

Yep, that's the idea. It wouldn't be fair to say that people are being held accountable to our new system's standards for things done under the less standardized system of moderation before.

And again, just so everyone sees it:

If you haven't gotten warnings or had posts removed, then yes, you can assume you won't have any issues under the new policies.

You can always appeal a warning to me, even if I issued the warning.

OttoVann · **04-30-2015, 02:48 PM**

As long as I am immune to points the system is fine.

« Next Oldest \| Next Newest »
Pages (14): « Previous 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 … 14 Next » Jump to page:

Feedback for moderation policy post

RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes