[DENIED]Start actually banning people that interfere in RAS instead of infractions

See title above.

Been seeing way too many randoms try and interfere and post on a report they're not even involved in and they obviously were NOT asked by handling staff member to comment. MATTER OF FACT THIS HAS BEEN OCCURRING WAY MORE FREQUENTLY THAN AROUND THE TIMEFRAME THAT VENG HAS ACTUALLY WRITTEN OUT THE THREAD LINKED BELOW FOR RAS.

Do NOT post unless you are directly involved in report [YOU WILL BE INFRACTED OR TEMPORARILY BANNED]

Also while we're at it, while quoting and referencing the same thread link, which is actually stickied in RAS in the first fucking place, I'd like to re-point out these two pointers below as they're going to reinforce what I'm actually going to suggest.

You are directly involved if:

• You are the person making the report
• You are the person being accused (the defendant)
• You middle manned the trade and are providing screenshots neither of the party has
• The moderator handling the case has tagged you and asked for your input
• Employees of a business may post on a report directed at their employer if they have relevant information to contribute

• 1st offense: Infraction
• 2nd offense: 3 day ban
• 3rd offense: 7 day ban
• 4th offense: 1 month ban.

Take note, a lot of the offending posts I've seen happen to be from people who didn't get approval from the handling staff member to lend a helping hand/comment on the thread or they simply wanted to say whatever the fuck they wanted to say like a toddler on a fucking playground in elementary school when they aren't involved in any single way and clearly didn't give a shit about getting infracted for it. THIS SHOULD TELL STAFF MEMBERS infractions didn't do actual shit. In the small and unrealistic chance if they were speaking on behalf of a business, well they obviously didn't make that clear enough either. I'm not the only person here on Sythe who has considered this an annoyance as it takes away the element of relevancy and more importantly, it also distracts users and staff members, including the handling moderator off of what is there in the report that's being exposed that we need to know about/be aware of against the accused or the reporter.

Since obviously infractions don't do shit and randoms are becoming more consistent with RAS interference, I'd also like to point out that Veng's stickied thread in the RAS was made in February 2020 so it's at least 3 years old, coming up close to 4 years. I wouldn't say it's out of date because all of the rules listed are still enforced but I speak for a lot of people when I say there needs to be harsher punishments handed out.

MY SUGGESTION IS TO UPDATE OFFENSES AND ADD HARSHER ONES IN AS SHOWN BELOW

• 
  
  
  • 1st offense: 3 day ban
  • 2nd offense: 7 day ban
  • 3rd offense: 1 month ban
  • 4th offense: Permanent ban from RAS threads.

You can update the time frame for the bans for the first 3 offenses however necessary. You guys are beyond the point of handing out infractions though.

While I did also anticipate that if one is to be permanently banned from the RAS threads and in the case they do get scammed and need to file a report, There's a way around that obviously.

Do you remember seeing this on Veng's thread?

'Even if you think you have relevant information you must,

• Report the post with the information if a moderator has not replied yet
• PM the moderator handling the case with the information

The moderator can deem its relevance and then distribute the information as needed.'

This can also be updated to reflect and display something similar to this: 'If you in the future happen to get permanently banned from the RAS section and in the case you get scammed and need to file a report, forward it to a moderator that can post the thread on your behalf.'

Yes, Staff members can also post the report for you on your behalf if it's ever needed obviously as there have been people who filed reports on behalf of others before and it was allowed and if you need your business to make the report, then your boss can also do that via the business account. And vice versa is also true. If the person who cannot see the RAS threads gets accused for any reason, Staff members can simply PM the accused and relay relevant information on the thread in return in that case. SO there is NO REASON why perm ban from RAS should not be an option in that case.

Obviously people can still post in RAS on guest accounts and there's a lot of people who fail to follow the formats too but there really isn't a suggestion for all of this nor is there a true hotfix for various reasons and you can't fix stupid either. Anyway, out of best interests and a lot of consideration, I feel like this is the best suggestion that can be made regarding this at this time. I don't care what kind of feedback this will get but it's been crystal clear that something needed to be updated for a while.

 

A 3 day ban for a first offense is too harsh. The current punishment guidelines are fine.

The problem here is many users do not read stickied threads. A better solution is to have stickied threads of each forum be prompt for viewing before posting.

 

As for the stickied threads being a prompt, I was actually heavily debating whether that could be a thing or not before I wrote out this suggestion. I know it's possible to have a prompt pop-up with PMs as I've seen it happen while doing a few trades via Sythe DMs. Whether it can work over to threads as well, I haven't seen any single forum thread that does this yet so it's probably grey waters for staff there. Then there's also the concerns of pop-up blockers being a thing AND the likelihood of inexperienced site users straight up just dismissing it a millisecond in and rushing into the forum section. I did tell myself that I'd be interested if that could work as well lol. Good suggestion there as well though.

 

Current punishment is fine. See no reason to change it.

Infraction
3 day
7 day
1 month
If users continue, up to staff at this point.

 

Great idea. I can see how new members can skip past stickied posts as they either cannot be bothered or simply don’t see them. This would ensure that users understand the rules of that given section before even giving them access to the content. However, is this feature even offered by Xenforo? Or can it be coded in?

 

Imo we're already being too strict.

 

Agreed.
I've gotten an infraction for commenting on a report where I had been tagged in.
That should imo warrant publicly posting a relevant response, emphasis on relevant

 

My guess and this is just my speculation but I'm guessing the accuser or defendant had tagged you and not the handling moderator and getting tagged doesn't directly mean you're involved in the report if they didn't ask you to confirm anything and the handling moderator didn't ask for input from you at the time. Maybe they didn't make it clear enough. Who knows. Get that shit clarified next time I guess?

 

Agreed. sick of being 3day banned

 

No we aint.

 

Just wanted to come back around and re-clarify since some of you all are actually missing a point here. I placed the 3 day ban under first offense 'merely' as a placeholder. I legitimately don't care if it could be set as 3 days or not. If the suggestion gets approved, staff can decide if the first offense 1 hour ban, 6 hour ban, 1 day ban or w/e they feel is more suitable with them. just wanted to clear that up. I still strongly feel like staff have to take a small amount extra measures above infractions.

To help fix this, I've also edited my original post to bold and underline the statement I had put under my suggested updated punishment thresholds: You can update the time frame for the bans for the first 3 offenses however necessary. You guys are beyond the point of handing out infractions though.

 

I think this suggestion is still worth looking into regardless of outcome.

Once again, before I get more comments on about the suggested punishments that should of been given, they're simply placeholders. Staff can determine what duration would be more convenient for them in the future in the case this does get approved.

Back to the main point. Apparently it seems like it's been happening again more so frequently this week than previously. I actually have one recent example I can showcase.




As shown above is a scam report thread from the RAS forum created on January 16, 2024. So this is stupid recent at the time of this post.

Let's get the basic information out of the way here.

-The OP in this case, is reporting Runestake and Fox. No one else but the OP and the two individuals that got tagged are involved in said report.

-No handling moderator so no one knows who they're supposed to ask for permission other than Yirru, Runestake and Fox to post on that specific thread.

Now can anyone tell me what's wrong in this picture? Yes I'm sure some of you do and a bigger handful of you may be pissed off that they're not allowed to simply comment on anything in RAS and turn a blind eye to this.

Vallenttas decides that he's above the law on sythe.org and gets to barge in on the report and immediately comments while he is not involved in the report itself AND did not get moderator clearance to post on the specific thread shown in both screenshots.

This is basically demonstrating what's been happening a bit too often and is one of the sole reasons I wanted to bring this suggestion into the light in the first place. The way I see it, and there are many others that had problems with outside interference that are able to confirm as well, the stickied post in the RAS section is there for a reason. By inserting yourself into the report (The handling moderator would usually see the irrelevant post as: For no reason), and by saying shit that nobody asked for on the specific RAS report and ultimately being a time-waste in general on the specific RAS report then don't get mad for being a disrespectful sack of shit lol.

That being said, I think there's still some potential for other ideas on how to tackle people who like to barge into reports whenever they liked to. If there's any additional ideas feel free to add them in the thread.

EDIT: Also thank you to the moderator (Nah. Not naming who for safety reasons.) that took very swift action in removing Vallenttas's post in the thread I had used as an example.

 

Concept idea,
Fix instead of punish:

A lock system which only allows certain profiles to post, initiated by handling mod?

 

I think the idea is that RaS threads are like public trials ala common law. Locking by system would probably give too much 'judicial' power to the chosen authorities.

Mods make the final call and interpret the rules sure, but a fair trial still involves being judged by a jury of your peers. The community gets a say in matters like the acceptability of evidence and interpretation of rules.

I find that, like Wikipedia, the fact that some rules are not baked in software, takes away a lot of power from those with technical skills or indirect access to the technical resources, and rightly gives it to the users, who are free to set rule systems in plain English, without needing to modify a system with all the costs and risks involved.

 

Ok, so I made it clear that I like rules being set in English and manually enforced, instead of set in code and autoenforced.

Now on to the actual rules. I think randos definitely have no reason to interfere in the report thread itself, in the same way they are not allowed to interrupt a trial and raise an issue. Now, they do have the technical capacity to do so, but it's just against the rules.

Similarly, in Sythe any member can view the threads and can technically comment on them, there's scenarios where this might be useful, when someone has information related to the case, if they are being accused. But like a real life scenario, there's no physical barrier making it impossible for unrelated viewers to speak, it's just a matter of respect and common sense really.

To be fair the system is quite lenient, in common law a single warning is issued and you would be thrown out of court, additionally you may be held in contempt and get penalized right away.

System looks reasonable to me.