Warning System

[NAOutdoors]

For each edit that is made on a post for COC reason please leave a note on the account. Once an account has 3 notes that will equal 1 warning and a "warn user" will be sent to the user.
If a post is bad enough to skip the 3 account notes and the account receives a "warn user" this will also be 1 warning.

3 warnings will result in a 7 day.
Once the member has returned 2 warnings will result in a 30 day.
Once the member has returned 1 warning will result in a 90 day ban.
Next, Warnings are over and it's a permament ban.

Notes will run for 90 days. If a member has a note added to his/her account and then 91 days later has another this will still be considered 1 note.

We hope that when a player receives a warning that they will think better on their next post.

This system is NOT to be shared with any members.

[Welsch]

Ho-hum... there seem to be some points I think some clarification (or discussion) is needed - but I am too tired right now to deal with it... so expect some questions tomorrow

[NAOutdoors]

Ho-hum... there seem to be some points I think some clarification (or discussion) is needed - but I am too tired right now to deal with it... so expect some questions tomorrow

Yes, please ask

[Welsch]

Good Lord, that has been an awfully long wait for "tomorrow" - I did not forget about it, but something else always came up... and the forum was so nice and quiet for a while...

Well, here are a few questions and comments that I (still) have after reading the new system specs:

• Do we carry over "old" warnings and bans (which have no "best before" date like user notes in the new system) from before the new system was established? For example, if someone already had been banned once, is this going to put him in the "2 more warnings until 30 day ban" stage?
• Regarding the user notes' "best before" date - do we really need to count off 90 days, or could we agree to make that "3 months" - it's much easier and quicker to just check for a date three months earlier than trying to figure out which date it was exactly 90 days ago.
• Who is going to do the necessary actions if certain trigger points are reached (issue a warning after three notes, issue a ban after the appropriate amount of warnings)? The moderator adding the note/warning reaching the threshold? David cleverly (and sneakily ) used the passive form when describing this, but there are no fancy automatics in the forum software. So, who's responsibility is this going to be?
• What reason are we going to give to a user when issuing a warning after three notes, without making at least a passing reference to some sort of cumulative system in effect?
• I agree that we should not make all the details of this system publicly known, but maybe an official post notifying the users that some sort of cumulative system is now in effect, and especially that each warning (which where not taken very seriously so far) is bringing you closer to ban. I would even argue that telling them how the bans are staggered (7 days, 30 days, 90 days, permanent - but no need to tell them exactly how many warnings you need to trigger those stages) could help to achieve the goal of "We hope that when a player receives a warning that they will think better on their next post.". Warnings were rare so far and are not really perceived as a threat - so unless you make it known that some things have changed, warnings will be not as effective a deterrent as they could be. [Just like the Doomsday Machine in "Dr. Strangelove" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmCKJi3CKGE ]

[NAOutdoors]

Do we carry over "old" warnings and bans (which have no "best before" date like user notes in the new system) from before the new system was established? For example, if someone already had been banned once, is this going to put him in the "2 more warnings until 30 day ban" stage?

If we all agree I would say yes, Bans can carry over. It seems that our repeat members are the only ones this would apply to anyway.

Regarding the user notes' "best before" date - do we really need to count off 90 days, or could we agree to make that "3 months" - it's much easier and quicker to just check for a date three months earlier than trying to figure out which date it was exactly 90 days ago.

Yes, I see no problem with this as we can always give or take a day or two if needed.

Who is going to do the necessary actions if certain trigger points are reached (issue a warning after three notes, issue a ban after the appropriate amount of warnings)? The moderator adding the note/warning reaching the threshold? David cleverly (and sneakily ) used the passive form when describing this, but there are no fancy automatics in the forum software. So, who's responsibility is this going to be?

We trust you guys to make the right call, However if you would like for me to do the honors let me know. I'll leave this up to who makes the last note.

What reason are we going to give to a user when issuing a warning after three notes, without making at least a passing reference to some sort of cumulative system in effect?

When 3 notes are made we can issue them a warning and in the warning mention some of their actions. This will also show them that we are not only talking about something that happened right then but also something that did a few days to a few weeks ago.

I agree that we should not make all the details of this system publicly known, but maybe an official post notifying the users that some sort of cumulative system is now in effect, and especially that each warning (which where not taken very seriously so far) is bringing you closer to ban. I would even argue that telling them how the bans are staggered (7 days, 30 days, 90 days, permanent - but no need to tell them exactly how many warnings you need to trigger those stages) could help to achieve the goal of "We hope that when a player receives a warning that they will think better on their next post.". Warnings were rare so far and are not really perceived as a threat - so unless you make it known that some things have changed, warnings will be not as effective a deterrent as they could be. [Just like the Doomsday Machine in "Dr. Strangelove" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmCKJi3CKGE ]

Let me think on how we could word something like this.

[Welsch]

Ok, I just made another entry to user magsaadi's account ( http://forum.thehunter.com/mcp.php?i=no ... es&u=21395 ), and if I count it right, he has now accumulated 4 entries in the last 90 days. High time for a warning - but I would ask you, David, to do the honors.

Two reasons - first "magsaadi" is already ***** with me, if I slap him with a warning on top of the email I already sent, things will not calm down for sure. I guess a warning issued from another person might avoid the impression of "oh, it's just this one guy who has it in for me!".
And second - I would like to see how to formulate such a three-strikes based warning correctly. Sure, I could probably come up with something myself, but I'd rather get the precedent done by a pro

Addendum: I did apologize by PM to magsaadi for my apparent misinterpretation of his first remark, that then sparked his comment I linked above - but he still better had contacted me by PM to set me straight instead of discussing it in public, and it still does not fully explain away his "small minds" remark in the later post. But I might not have written him up for just that in the first place... which would still leave him at three write-ups since the last warning. Not sure what to do about that now...

[NAOutdoors]

Ok, I just made another entry to user magsaadi's account ( http://forum.thehunter.com/mcp.php?i=no ... es&u=21395 ), and if I count it right, he has now accumulated 4 entries in the last 90 days. High time for a warning - but I would ask you, David, to do the honors.

Two reasons - first "magsaadi" is already ***** with me, if I slap him with a warning on top of the email I already sent, things will not calm down for sure. I guess a warning issued from another person might avoid the impression of "oh, it's just this one guy who has it in for me!".
And second - I would like to see how to formulate such a three-strikes based warning correctly. Sure, I could probably come up with something myself, but I'd rather get the precedent done by a pro

Addendum: I did apologize by PM to magsaadi for my apparent misinterpretation of his first remark, that then sparked his comment I linked above - but he still better had contacted me by PM to set me straight instead of discussing it in public, and it still does not fully explain away his "small minds" remark in the later post. But I might not have written him up for just that in the first place... which would still leave him at three write-ups since the last warning. Not sure what to do about that now...

Done

[Welsch]

Thank you!

[Welsch]

You are right of course - but the most important reason why I myself violate this procedure is simply that Tapatalk is not supporting user notes. And I am spending most of my time watching the forum on mobile devices. On an iPad it is still possible to at least switch over to the browser and open the normal forum interface, but it is still quite clumsy to do any multi-browser-tab work that is needed if I want to add some quotes or links. And don't get me started about being on the phone...

Second point is time constraints - sometimes I just have the time to squeeze in the initial mod work, but not the "paper trail". I try to do that later on... if I don't forget it, that is
And sometimes just trying to get a difficult situation under control, moving posts, editing posts and replies, writing PMs to affected users etc. while people keep posting like crazy - it can take up all the time and energy I have. When things finally calm down, I might go to bed spent but with the full resolve to write up all the less important stuff the next day, alas... you know how it goes sometimes.

(Case in point, the sad tale of oppressed user poached, whose antics keep interrupting my efforts to write this post here time and again. Read all about it here: http://forum.thehunter.com/mcp.php?i=no ... es&u=22650 )

Lastly (and I guess most controversially) there is the thing that I sometimes deliberately do not write up small mod acts, e.g changing a title or moving to the correct forum. Maybe even a small language edit, if the user is not a "regular". The point is that I sometimes rather edit (or remove) something preventively, and I don't want those borderline cases (that are very much based solely on my perception of what might come from them) to reflect badly on the user. If it becomes a recurring theme with a certain user however, there will be write-ups - although maybe just summarily.

Summarily write-up - that leads me right to ReadThoreau, the guy where I have probably done the most work without writing a note every single time. But let's be honest - if I had written up every single mod action for RT, he would already be banned to kingdom come. If he is on a run, he might reach the amount of user notes necessary for a temp ban in just a single afternoon. But honestly, knowing that, I would have refrained from many precautionary or preventive post removals, and rather waited until he either clearly overstepped the line or his incessant posting causes yet another avoidable dispute on the forum, that the mods than have to police. I do not want him to collect points towards a ban because I removed some of his more apocalyptic or repetitive posts on a hunch but I'd also rather not have those posts on the forum. So I do summarily write-ups if he is more "active" and annoying than usual.


Oh, and what about me copying over some of the PMs I get and write as a mod, mostly if there is a conflict? It's just to document what's happening for the other mods - not necessarily because I want these entries to count towards the "warning counter". I think it is a good tool to keep the other mods in the loop, but I'll admit I muddles the water a bit in regards to the warning system.

Yeah, I know... excuses, excuses
I guess the tl;dr is that most of the times it happens, circumstances and personal fallibility preclude proper user note entries, and it will be hard to change that. Only in some very special cases it is a conscious decision and therefore open to debate and change.

[Loque]

Where we should write the note?