Supercue

iTrader: (1)

In view of the amount of people being infracted for innocuous comments would you be in favour of;

a) Scrapping the Infraction System

b) Keep as is

c) Keep but show Infractor User name

Voting on this should be interesting

Jamie

I say kill those who abuse it!


ok hmm remove them from the community

pslewis

Naming the Infractor would give it some credibility - unjustified Infractions would cease overnight, as it would be crystal clear that it was undeserved.

A list of names and aliases should also be available - 'some' people infract under different names, so it looks like different people - but, in reality, it's a small group.

Supercue

iTrader: (1)

Jamie as much there will be plenty of support for your first option a tad too far me thinks

This will not make a blind jot of difference as we know it's not diificult to re-register under a new name as some can vouch

DCI Gene Hunt

Scrap it.... there's no need for it as that's what a forums moderators are for

Supercue

iTrader: (1)

I couldnt agree more fella

MattW

Keep it, it's mildly amusing

stilover

I'd say keep it but show the Infractor. The infraction system can quickly get rid of Trolls, but showing who infracted who could be usefull.

Obviously some idiot has been infracting Davegtt, so if it shows who it is, either it would stop this idiot, or allow the rest of us to infract them to get rid.

Scrapping it could give Trolls a free pass.

Spoon

Maybe compile a chart page with really pretty colours so that the serial infractors could download it at will and print it off to show their cuddly toys they do have a credibility rating online if nowhere else?

fast bloke

One abuse of infraction system - temporary ban and publishing of all aliases. 2nd abuse - permanent ban. Only users who have been here more than 6 months can give infractions. Bans/infraction points apply to all aliases. You could still abuse it, but the effort involved would be extreme. (Register 5 accounts from 5 mail addys and 5 different computers, wait six months to give Pete a 2 week ban. I don't think that even Uncle Buck would go to those lengths)

messiah

I voted C - I think if infractions were no longer private the it would massively reduce the abuse the system receives, the infractor would would be held accountable for why it was given.

The infraction system makes ScoobyNet Policy the most interesting to read section of the forum these days...

Supercue

iTrader: (1)

As Pete said earlier plenty of users have multiple IDs and infract accordingly with little if any comeback.
I agree it would be nice to see who did what but in years gone by I thought the Mods did a great job without having to have this stupid system.

fast bloke

Alternatively - once an infraction is given, all members get a chance to rate the post. If the rating is positive after a week, ban the infractor. If it is negative, ban the infractee. It could truely be said that the community has spoken in that case.

Gear Head

iTrader: (2)

So what happens when a valid infraction is given?
If that person's name is made public, all those against infractions will just infract him for the sake of it.
And then people will infract them back and so on and so on.
Either ditch the system completely and get some moderators that are on the ball, but fair, or, perminantly ban those that caused the infraction system to be created in the first place. You all know who you are!

Pete, you have toned down one hell of a lot since the system was introduced. This means you 'can' be funny without being rude!

It just seems to me that all those complaining, were the ones that have dished out the dirt before. Revenge is is dish best served cold people.

And for those of you that truely are 'abusing the system', f&ck off and go and play in your sand pit.

(preparing for the infraction on-slaught! )

Spoon

Yeh, so he/she could then receive IM's from the 'victim' saying how they were going to find them and karate chop their spleen from 20 feet.

Supercue

iTrader: (1)

Jamie

See chris has just hit the nail on the head

Supercue

iTrader: (1)

Scrapping is still out in front though

Nate

iTrader: (2)

Bloody hell Andy ..... A useful topic !!!!!!

Wonders will never cease

Markus

One of the reasons for the anonymous system is to prevent retaliation infractioning (if that's a word), as it *would* happen. This would create even more work for the mods/admin to clear things up when a couple of users have had a spat. You could argue that is what the mods are there for though.

Perhaps a trial of showing whom infracted whom could be started, have it run for maybe a month or two, see if there is any difference. I think infractions would go up for the reason mentioned above. Then again, it could prove to some users that they are not being targeted by a single person, or just a few, but, in fact, many people are giving them infractions.

Is the real issue here not that you get an infraction, but that a certain number of infractions will get you a temporary ban? Just one infraction will not get you banned, it is a cumulative thing. If you get an infraction then you have a choice of what to do, ignore it, or make a complaint. If you make a complaint it might be reversed, in which case, fine. If it is not reversed then accept it and move on and it will expire.

If people are being continually infracted then perhaps that should be some indication to that person that perhaps what they post isn't liked by many. Of course we mere mortals cannot tell if that is the case, but I would really have thought if there was bullying/victimization going on then it would be dealt with.
Do people really think there is some collusion going on between Simon and a single user, or a group of users, that is allowing them to get away with repeatedly infracting someone without punishment? It seems to be some believe this may be the case.

As also mentioned on another thread, the ability for someone who issued an infraction to reverse the infraction would be a nice idea, sometimes we make mistakes, be it giving the wrong type of infraction, or giving an infraction to the wrong user.

Supercue

iTrader: (1)

Even I fall ill sometimes

messiah

Thats the chance you take if you infract Chuck Norris...

Part of the infraction process would have to be the infractor providing a short reason why (sent as a PM to his "victim"), the receiver would then know who & why and the matter could be resolved, & reversed without someone running to Webby...

fatherpierre

Where the "I don't care" option?

Markus

Blimey, I'm agreeing with Spoon! But the utensil like one is pretty spot on. You'd get IM's from the person you infracted, be it from their main account or one of their alias accounts, or perhaps even from others who like them calling you all sorts of names. Plus of course, as mentioned, there would be revenge infraction from the user, their alias or their friends.

Supercue

iTrader: (1)

Not required as the title is Scrap or Keep

Markus

That would only work if users were allowed to reverse infractions they have given. In the current setup you cannot do this. So if you send a PM, it's not going to help any as you still need to go to Webby to get the thing reversed, in which case, if you have an infraction you think is unjustified, post in policy about it.

Dream Weaver

Keep it as it is now - since being introduced the amount of dross being posted and abusive behaviour has dropped, and the forum is heading back towards the very good old days of 7 + years ago.

If people post respectfully and don't troll/fish etc then everyone is happy and no-one gets an infraction.

fatherpierre

Well if that's the case why is there an option to modify

DCI Gene Hunt

And we can all merrily dance hand in hand into the sunset.....




That's rather a naive view of the world, or rather Scoobynet, the fact is Scoobynet mirrors the "Real World" and as such has MANY different personalities to deal with .... so your utopia of 'lets all wear white gowns and constantly agree with each other' just isn't going to happen....

Supercue

iTrader: (1)

Actually option C occurred to me as I was creating the poll
Apologies for the "I dont care crew"