I think this post does have a good point

 

Would have to agree, even as a relative newbie.
Some good points have been made along the way here and there, but lost in the bickering, now there is an SN first................. not.

 

Stu,

I would echo what 84of300 posted. The infraction system should stay, but perhaps it needs to be tweaked.

Giving ultimate power over the appeal process to any one person is always going to give rise to problems. One person cannot, with the best will in the world, exercise the degree of objectivity required. Simon has made some great calls over the years, however he has also made some apalling ones. And that is not my personal view, that is a view shared by many of the active posters on here.

Had it been a case of "its my site, and I'll say what goes" then fine - take whatever stance is necessary. However, the promoted culture here has always been about "what the community wants" rather than "what the webmaster wants" (wanted?), in which case for one person to act as judge, jury and executioner over the infraction system completely contradicts that culture.

Again, post ratings work well, on the whole, until they are abused by either groups of users (who may be one person, of course) or, and much worse IMO, altered by site admin to either justify a decision or influence perception.

Ideally, I'd prefer more moderators than a system that can be open to abuse, however I am fully aware of the effort that requires, having done it for a few years, and the difficulties involved.

Incidentally, and somewhat ironically, one of the reasons I resigned was due to Simon's unwillingness to give the moderators the powers that paying users now have.

A moderator driven infraction system and the ability to ban new user accounts set up for trolling (as we have now) would have been a Godsend at that time.

Whether it would have negated the need for a full infraction system or not is of course something that we will never now know.

And now a complete irrelevance, of course.

More moderators would, potentially, reduce the need for users to issue infractions - which would then become effective backup as required rather than a substitute? There is no easy answer, that's for sure, and I have massive respect for the current moderators and the role they fulfill.

And for anyone (oik?) reading this who thinks I'm simply angling for the job, I can assure you I'm not. I genuinely believe this site needs more moderator support, irrespective of who that may involve.

And the best people to talk to about who would fit the role best are of course the existing moderators, specifically Puff and Scoobychick.

Just some thought on a Wednesday morning.

Regards

 

I disagree: post ratings and the infraction system promote a 'Lord of the Flies' culture. Their advantage is theoretical only: they are negative in every practical respect. The system was only brought in because the site was developing a problem and there werent enough moderators (and the few remaining had little power, which was retained by the then admin).

It would be a grave mistake to retain this flawed system, especially when a number of ex-moderators are prepared to return. With their efforts combined with those of the existing team; and if theyre given the authority that they need, then SN will come out from under this cloud.

Now: I fully expect my opinion to be negged; as is the SN way.

 

Im disagreeing only with the suggestion that the abused infraction and post rating systems be retained, btw.

Simon

 

 

Aaah then I would have to agree to a large degree on that. Maybe the infractions should be a couple of strikes, as the instant ban is. Needing a few people to make the call on it? If not inc a mod.

Its tough to find a happy medium, someone along the way will always disagree.

Oh and Swiss, Tachy goes to Coventry works a treat lol

 

[




Think on this: [learn? ]
If you had over 100 busy websites to work on every day of your working life, and only one was full of people who slagged you off at every opportunity, which do you think you would fix LAST if you had penty to keep you busy?


K
Just my 2p's worth, but the message i get from the above quote is:

"dont you dare disagree with us or question our methods in any way, or we will leave your beloved site to rot"

In my proffesional capacity at work, if i have a problem customer, they are the FIRST to be sorted out, not the last in a "Your all picking on me, so im ignoring you" kind of way!


And less enlargement adverts please, i feel inadequate enough as it is

 

Keep the infraction system at your peril, beryl

It's a system designed for those who are incapable of standing their ground by using words, common sense, wit, and intelligence. Pay a fiver and you can become a demi-god, even though most of the inhabitants of the town in which you live are ginger, have a slight squint, and mostly share the same surname

*runs*

^^ 'tis true though

 

I must concur ^^ and

 

 

This fella isn't going to be getting a Xmas card from me, thats for sure.

One can only presume his 30yr old lady friend told him to **** off and he has just awoken on the couch, sore, damp and grouchy, so has reached for his mouse to dish out some retribution...

Interestingly though, his being banned without me having to lift a finger, has just enlightened me as to the worth of the current infraction system no end. Does anyone think that was his intention all along?

P.S: I know some of you think we at IB should stay all business like and not have a giggle but hey, if we don't enjoy the forum too, what chance have your folks got?

 

It's certainly refreshing to have someone on a similar wavelength, stu, long may it continue.

 

Absolutely. Very nice to hear that, Stu. It's like a breath of fresh air

Can you unban me, by the way?

 

Damnit, had i known that page 14 would have reverted to seriousness i wouldn't have made the post above.. too late though.

Devil dog, thanks for that information which I wont quote as this is on too many pages as it is, i appreciate your time and thoughts on the matter. The same goes for anyone who wants to offer adult input.

Those of you whom insist on using alternate accounts wont be getting any of my time though as i can only presume you are hiding your normal user names because you dint want them to be associated with what you are typing.

 

I hope that youre kidding, because that was my concern. He just needed telling to shut up and be patient. The infraction/banning has only antogonised him more: he may have acted like a **** but he had a genuine grievance...

 

With SN that is: the mistake he was making was blaming you for that.

Btw: Im using this alternate account as my main PC/cookie isnt available to me at present. I doubt that you were referring to me but if so and if you cant simply see, then feel free to ask.

Simon

 

I was only half kidding I'm afraid. I really don't have time to be constantly abused by folk who don't wish to listen to sense and would rather ignore my past statements and instead constantly pick at things for no other reason than to cause a row. Bringing the forum back to how you all want and deserve it to be is not as simple a task as you may think, its going to involve a lot of time and trouble so it suits me for trouble makers to go and play elsewhere.

Bear in mind that isn't necessarily IB Policy, it is simply me being totally honest with you as one forum user to another whom has been instrumental in offering good adult discussion that i value to this topic. I realise it probably wont endear me to many of you and maybe i should be treading more softly in my opening hours over here, but I am not one to hide from the facts or paint them a nice colour just to suit others. We may as well all sing from the same hymn sheet so to speak and crack on with making the changes that we all want to make.

And no, i was referring to a couple of folk on here with quite a few registered names.

 

I'm not using my real account as I've been banned for life until I die and beyond for posting a picture of a Lego toy

I have already told you who I really am though, Stu

 

Same here

We DO want to be associated with what we're typing instead of having to use an alternate. That's the whole point

Would some money help?

*gets out eggsburt's wallet*


Euros, eggsburt?

 

To be fair, he was prancing about like a vapid/rabid/whatever clone (as in the user thats against racism, but is racist against the French ).

I'm on the fence with infraction, needs dictate that it must be reviewed and I think cannot continue in its current form. But removal altogether? Well on the same part there is a core of users who aren't mature or balanced enough to use it, and without infraction, they will still remain. This is the problem, and they are the ones who need to be removed from this forum. (secretly, I was hoping SdB was using this to track the usage of users issuing the infractions, with the end target of gaining evidence to justify their permanent removal, seems I was wrong )

The main issue is that it only requires one person to issue an infraction, therfore its quite easy to ban someone on a whim just by seraching for any post they feel walks the line of acceptability. That being opinionative posts. Opinions are intentionally or mistakenly construed as trolling; to whatever whim the issuer feels, with no need for explaining why they issued or being held accountable. This means the system can easily be used to ban someone because another person doesn't like them, or what they say. Opinions can be seen as trolling. This has to stop.

Because of this, infractions are totally anti-community, because currently its NOT a community decision. My view is infractions should only be delt by group decision or by people of elevated power and can be held accountable by their actions and must explain their reasons for doing so (something of which the current system doesn't allow). By that I mean moderators or admin. The system still proves usefull for telling annoying users to STFU when their conduct is out of line (abusive, condescending, anti-community spirit, text talk ( ) etc), but I belive it needs to be a group decesion or peer decision based on the general concensus of the forum.

On the end of all that, is something that remains to be done about the fourms rules, Ts and Cs (and I have asked for more than once), they are a mess of stickies dotted around everywhere.

One example of which is "Trolling" needs to be correctly defined in the forums T&Cs which are currently so vaigue that all I have to do to consider someone as trolling is to disagree with their opinion.

This forums T&C's need to be re-written, into a single thread, and indexed by a hyperlinked contents page. Afterall, it is non-productive to have a rule enforcment system when the rules are all over the place, isn't it?

 

I have an awful feeling that I agree with what Ali's just said

 

the point being though: you can have a grievance without acting like a ****.

 

<sob>

If one more bloody person quotes 84 when she was quoting me... I'm going to get medieval on someones ****.

I dunno - I make the bloody point and no bugger notices. Some chick with ***** does and EVERYONE takes notice. Sexist *******s.

(everything said above is completely tongue in cheek... as long as the idea takes hold I don't care WHO gets the credit )

 

Oh, and about that Best Regards idea.

I always prefer to use the phrase "With all due respect"

You can say ANYTHING after using "with all due respect"

"xxxx, with all due respect I think you are a complete **** and a wastral. You need to get a life and stop trolling threads"

You see? Works like a charm

 

You sure your ok?

I think you might need a lie down

 

Oi! Does'nt anyone work around here!

Took me a year to catch up from the last post yesterday nite!

 

Tut - play nicely please

 

Puff, don't you reckon it might be an idea to get rid of at least some of the whole page of stickies about the infraction system in Policy now? It's looks sort of silly