Restructure on Sythe.org's punishment system

I'm unaware of stuff like that I'm afraid.
If my opinion were implemented however, I'm fairly sure it could be coded so it were possible. Don't let the current coding hold you back in striving for the best punishment system.

 

It would take work, but from what I'm seeing in the proactivity of the administration lately (nothing you guys can really see yet, most of it is behind the scenes etc) we seem to be ready to go to any lengths to make our members 100% happy with the community. I think we're finally ready to revitalize sythe.

 

Well all coding aside, don't you think repeat offenders that continually get banned from individual forums should get a harder smack on the wrist? I think a enforcing the a few forum bans and then moving into something harsher would be decent.

 

What we're trying to avoid is banning people entirely, our end goal is to loosen up on rules while still keeping our post-quality standards, thereby reducing the amount of ridiculous bans, and hopefully increasing activity in the long run

 

Is there not an alternate way that sythe can make it easier for mods to view section banns, it might be a hassle but I think it wilk really help out the forum, alittle more hassle for mods but it will keep the sections locked down.

 

Bump for exposure

 

Bumps for exposure

 

Hmm I agree with the idea. I always thought that infractions should be more public such as mods actually see yellow or red cards on a post to indicate you or someone else infracted/warned the post. The entire point of the infraction ban is a public indication that the person is misbehaving, perhaps this system would make it more obvious.

 

I am wondering the same thing as Jack, what are you going to do with people who just don't learn? Keep section banning them and wasting time? It seems inefficient and fairly useless for repeat offenders. If we are going to loosen up the rules then we need a higher standard for post quality and stop modding sections laxly because of inactivity, in my opinion. Take the SFA - it's no longer fun anymore because the utter amount of bullshit that is allowed now. Every thread you go into devolves into some sort of personal attack or opinion slinging with no fact to back it up.

 

"If we're going to loosen up..., stop modding sections laxly"

We need to choose one or the other: lighten up on the modding and punishment, or punish strictly to increase quality. My figuring is that quality members aren't going to post less nor reduce their quality in posts as a result of this, and while shitty members who just like to spam might try to take advantage of this, forum section banning is a better alternative to temp forum banning for simply spamming.

Secondly, "take the SFA", if users try to spam the SFA, they'll get banned from there. If they get banned more than once or twice, then they get perm-SFA banned. We're not one short on our user database, and SFA remains clean

 

Bump for exposure

 

No support.
There are some people that make an account for the plain purpose of spamming the forum with uselessness. So how long will it take them to get banned after spamming the entire sections and being banned from 1 by 1?

 

Obviously there's going to be special cases, accounts that are made with the soul purpose of spamming will be banned immediately, as per what we've always done. As for legitimate users making new accounts in order to spam: it rarely happens how, I don't see why someone would go out of their way to do it after we've revamped the infractions system.

 

Hmm yea, after reading that post, i have to agree with this. I know the forum which this is being applied to. It's working pretty good over there so I'm sure it will work here aswell.

Each moderated post should clearly state why the moderator had to interfere and which rule they broke because the content of those "disruptive" posts will probably be erased only be known by the poster & the moderator. So the newcomers(or people who never read the rules) get a bit more "educated" on the rules.

 

This one got's my support, great idea Mohtasa.

 

Why can't we have both? A point added to your infractions and a public reprimanding. Although don't mods give out like 100+ a day? "Stop posting spam" and then like 2 seconds it would be replaced by someone elses public punishment, and then 1 second later replaced.

just seems like more work for the mods but

I SUPPORT DIS

 

I wholeheartedly agree on this. Also, moderators should be slightly more loose on infractions in my opinion.

 

No support, the current system works fine IMHO, but moderators (globals I believe) can swap the bans from perm to forum anyways.

 

Bump, another issue this would solve is "Accusing of scamming without proof". This is a difficult rule to enforce because much of the time, the accusation for scamming is legitimate, just put in the wrong place. The user who was scammed doesn't need to be infracted for something like this, that's like adding insult to injury. With this new system, they would be reprimanded publicly for not putting it in the Report a Scammer forum, their post would remain, and people would see that we're not allowing spam in the market, but neither are we "trying to cover up for a scammer by deleting accusations"

 

Good idea!