c_maguire

I think this would be just the ticket with a few tweeks.

Firstly, when you infract you do not remain anonymous.

Secondly, you have to provide a short justification (one line) for the infraction.

Thirdly, there is a limit on the number of infractions each person can give in any period.

Anyone guilty of idiotic infractions should be punished in much the same way as someone receiving multiple infractions.


Some of the threads on here (often with the same participants) are pure comedy, throw in a bit of infraction without anonymity and we could take it to the next level.

Maz

iTrader: (34)

Wouldn't work.

dpb

I think it gave the moderators stroke

c_maguire

That was because too many idiots were infracting left, right and centre for the sake of it.

fat-thomas

iTrader: (4)

bring back the f****** swear filter too.

DYK

If you can't stand the heat get out the kitchen.
Infractions was like dirty pigs at the trough,but it did give some drama to SN.

Lisawrx

iTrader: (1)

It wouldn't, just as it didn't back in the 'good old days' (tweeks or not) as people would just go after those they don't like, and it would be tit for tat. They would get around the justification as they'd be enforcing the rules, but I would put money on the fact that some would only enforce said rules on those they don't agree with, and let other comments go of a similar ilk (perhaps manner is a better word) because they don't have a problem with that person or their point of view.

To be honest, there would be no need for an infraction system full stop if some people just learned how to behave towards one another. It's not about agreeing with each other, but there are ways of speaking/debating that allows everyone to share their opinions without the need to be disrespectful, to get personal, or for the childish name calling to crop up.

I've been a member here for quite a few years now, mainly posting in NSR, the haven for arguments, yet in my years, I have managed to converse with people, disagree with them, yet remain civil. Why is that so difficult for some on here?

I've been part of discussions that have been heated, and where people have had views that I totally disagree with, but yet I still don't feel the need to get offensive. Challenge views by all means, walk away and give it up as a bad job if needs be, but bitching and sniping gets nobody anywhere.

Sorry for the boring post.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Because you have more patience than some, me being one of them. IMO there are people on this board who are borderline racists, homophobes and/or misogynists and most of the time I cannot be bothered to try and reason with people like that as as far as I am concerned they aren't worth it so I tend to just tell them what I think of them instead. HTH

Lisawrx

iTrader: (1)

You certainly do that.

Surely in the bigger picture, it's better to reason with people and encourage people to re-evaluate their views? Sometimes, people will just not be swayed, and like it or not, they are free to hold their views however distasteful they may be, and just in my opinion, there is nothing to be gained in lowering myself to getting into the whole sniping etc.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Yes they may be allowed to hold their views but when people are leaving this board because those views are being rammed down their throats in an aggressive and antagonistic manner at every available opportunity the time for reasoning is over IMO!

RA Dunk

Some of it (the infractions) was quite funny at the time though.

Jamie

Set lisa on the bad guys all will be well

c_maguire

Ok Lisa, so the infraction system is unlikely to return as the feeling is it will require too much moderating.

I have a lower level suggestion that requires no moderation. On the MLR registered users can 'thank' a poster for a useful post. If this happens the person or persons who have 'thanked' a poster for an individual post just appear as a list of usernames below the post.
I propose that users could 'like' or 'dislike' a post and the usernames would appear below the post, firstly the 'like' list and then the 'dislike' list.
I think giving users the opportunity to show how they feel about a post without having to post themselves would de-clutter some threads by removing some posts that contribute nothing to the thread, and in addition would allow users who browse Scoobynet but rarely post to easily express an opinion.

Jamie

Good idea.

Maz

iTrader: (34)

That's already been done too. They're all good suggestions in theory but open to abuse just like the infractions. There's an RTM function for reporting posts which contravene forum policy. It's not a perfect system but it works.
As Lisa has said it's often a thankless task being moderator. Especially with the demographic of Snet.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

I think the forum just needs better moderation. Aside from Lisa and Ali what other moderators do we see on here these days? I know it's a thankless task, but surely if you step up to the plate you should at least hop on and do your shift. It's not up to two people to do the whole job 24/7 surely?

Infractions, ratings have all been tried and are abused by those with an agenda which I suspect is the reason for the OP in this case being brutally frank!

Maz

iTrader: (34)

Agreed Chris, it does seem it's Lisa and Ali who generally have to sort out the mess. We need a pro active presence like theirs from the other mods.
Infractions, thank yous and likes may all be good ideas in theory but just like any noble intention started with good will, it all ends in politics.

Turbohot

Infraction system is not a good idea at all. Last time it existed it created so many bad feelings and confusion among the members. Even if the infraction givers are named, it will create nothing but bad feeling, if not confusion, and it will be a demise of the forum. Action speaks louder than words, but words may be better than the 'infraction' action in this situation, where the level of intelligence varies among the participants.

Don't give guns to the moneys.

Maz

iTrader: (34)

Monkeys

Maz

iTrader: (34)

Turbohot

Exactly.

neil-h

What could possibly go wrong

Love the way it holds the gun above it's head triumphantly after the soldiers have all legged it.

Turbohot

Last infraction phase makes me think of the Zimbardo Stanford experiment (1971), in much more extreme form. A very badly executed one with no structure whatsoever. Zimbardo one finished much earlier than intended, and the SN one went on for a year, I think. The ego expansion replaced the financial reward bit. What a mess that caused, Jesus! And one day, due to some glitch, everyone knew who was infracting them. Then started the chain of apology pms from one cyber persona to another; the people who you have never met, and never ever will. Christ, the hatred that got built over a year due to that infraction system was totally unnecessary and damaging to the human time, if not to the human psyche; that's with the assumption that all the infractors were humans. I can't be so sure. Anyway, what a complete waste of bandwidth, as they used to say in olden days.

It shouldn't be repeated in any shape or form.

An0n0m0us

The infraction system was the worst thing SN ever implemented and rightly so it was got rid of and never to be brought back. Was just a tool for tools to abuse.

An0n0m0us

I love that video

Maz

iTrader: (34)

100% agree with Anonomous and Swati. Infractions was open to abuse and unworkable.

stipete75

Same as RSOC too.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

We have the 'thank you for a useful post' feature on MBClub, but then again we don't have a load of bigots with personal axes to grind either!

neil-h

Is that part of the initiation ritual? You have to get so many 'thank yous' before they teach you the secret hand shake?

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

My ears are burning LOL.

We still have infractions. But to be frank it just annoys the person being "punished" even more so they usually end up acting up even more. Thats why I don't usually like using them.

If it were brought back under user's control, it'd just be used as a tool to "win" an argument on here. Much like sometimes moderators are used or expected to ban/punish someone because they can't get along with another forum member when the complainee is equally as bad (and usually the main reason why a RTM is not acted on - the conduct of the one reporting it is no better).

If someone is being a plank, don't bother replying to them and leave them alone to make a fool of themselves. Joining in and continually arguing with them when knowing full well you don't get on just makes it look to moderators that you want to argue with them and probably enjoy it.

It is the internet afterall, what better way to pass the time and entertain yourself than to argue with someone you have never met. I just wish I had the time to do that these days LOL.