Staff and Pardons

one thing that people often forget is that no-votes don't need to be posted. so there are a good number of threads that people read, decide they don't support, and accordingly don't post. i'm not a fan of this system, but that's how it is.

in the past, we talked about a "+/-5" system, where the pardon would move to USL if it got five supports and be denied if it got five no-supports regardless of time spent. i liked this idea and forget why we didn't implement it, maybe someone else remembers?

If you were having a get together and some people didn't come. Would you rather they call you and tell you they can't come, or would you be okay with them not telling you anything? Staff not posting on pardons isn't a direct indication they don't support it either, it could also mean they haven't looked at it.

 

[FireZ]

I read a lot of pardons but dont post on every one of them by no means

 

[DRSX]

This thread needed to be made.

There are currently 23 staff members, out of those 23, 19 usually, or are expected to post on a pardon in the first stage.

Out of those 19, 14 are inactive when it comes to moderator duties, or posting on pardons. This means 73% of staff don't actively post on pardons (support or not).

You need 5 supports for your pardon to proceed to the next stage, but with the inactivity, that aspiration is 35% likely to happen (it's higher if you're well known), and the likelihood of it passing that second stage is 70%, meaning there is a 65% chance that your pardon will fail (the number is most likely higher in actuality).

Let's focus on that. There needs to be measures taken to assure people who pardon are given a fair chance, especially for those with minor offenses.

Either give modscore for pardons, cut the number to 4 for the first stage, increase the waiting times before dismissal, and tell staff to do their job because this is ridiculous.

Keep in mind as you probably know already this is not a full time job for them, they got other things besides managing a Runescape based black market forum. I have a funny feeling as well that you're posting this because your retarded buddy Yz8 didn't do too well with his pardon, no offense but he was just as ass, anyway back to topic. I do agree however that the activity could be higher in other sections as well lets say with the report a scammer section there are reports that have been there for days and nobody gives a flying F about them which is bad because it lets who ever is doing what to just keep doing it.

 

Keep in mind as you probably know already this is not a full time job for them, they got other things besides managing a Runescape based black market forum. I have a funny feeling as well that you're posting this because your retarded buddy Yz8 didn't do too well with his pardon, no offense but he was just as ass, anyway back to topic. I do agree however that the activity could be higher in other sections as well lets say with the report a scammer section there are reports that have been there for days and nobody gives a flying F about them which is bad because it lets who ever is doing what to just keep doing it.

I was planning on making this thread for the last two months, but yes, his situation (lack of responses) did give me the motivation needed to bother making it. I'm very observant. As you can probably tell by reading the thread, this has been going on for years now. When more users are being promoted to staff for the purpose of balancing a system, but nothing has changed, there is a problem. Reading and replying to a pardon doesn't require much of a persons time. The system doesn't work properly if the workers don't casually participate. Sure the wagon still moves, but you're left with wheels that have cracked cogs in them. If you have anything to offer that would better this system, then by all means do tell.

 

[DRSX]

I was planning on making this thread for the last two months, but yes, his situation (lack of responses) did give me the motivation needed to bother making it. I'm very observant. As you can probably tell by reading the thread, this has been going on for years now. When more users are being promoted to staff for the purpose of balancing a system, but nothing has changed, there is a problem. Reading and replying to a pardon doesn't require much of a persons time. The system doesn't work properly if the workers don't casually participate. Sure the wagon still moves, but you're left with wheels that have cracked cogs in them. If you have anything to offer that would better this system, then by all means do tell.

Oh absolutely i couldnt agree with you more on that, and yes theres always improvements to make however i believe that its mostly based on the current mods dont simply have enough time to do what it takes to manage it smoothly ( time wise ) they are all most likely busy with different things in life

 

Oh absolutely i couldnt agree with you more on that, and yes theres always improvements to make however i believe that its mostly based on the current mods dont simply have enough time to do what it takes to manage it smoothly ( time wise ) they are all most likely busy with different things in life

This is why the 7 day grace period for pardons exists. I'm all for maintaining and fulfilling real life duties over virtual ones, but there needs to be a balance if you're going to exhibit such powers and the commitments that go along with it.

 

[Superfluous]

i agree with you, ghast, i'm all for transparency and forcing people to post support/no-support on pardons. but since people are kind of lax in doing this, the 7 day thing becomes a problem, which is i'm not a fan of the 7 day thing personally and why i suggested:

in the past, we talked about a "+/-5" system, where the pardon would move to USL if it got five supports and be denied if it got five no-supports regardless of time spent. i liked this idea and forget why we didn't implement it, maybe someone else remembers?

 

i agree with you, ghast, i'm all for transparency and forcing people to post support/no-support on pardons. but since people are kind of lax in doing this, the 7 day thing becomes a problem, which is i'm not a fan of the 7 day thing personally and why i suggested:

I'm torn on the idea of forcing staff to post on pardon. On one hand it would definitely increase production, but on the other it would probably disintegrate the genuine outlook on a pardon as a whole. I feel like those who voluntarily post would probably be more sincere, thus maintaining quality. It should be encouraged to post on pardons whether you support it or not just to increase activity and awareness.

in the past, we talked about a "+/-5" system, where the pardon would move to USL if it got five supports and be denied if it got five no-supports regardless of time spent. i liked this idea and forget why we didn't implement it, maybe someone else remembers?

This sounds like a great idea. If I recall correctly, pardons in the usl are based on %, and for a pardon to pass it must garner 65% approval or higher. That would explain why a lot of pardons that reach the second stage fail.

 

I'm sure you can argue that a certain number of staff do read them but don't support them, but as Ghast pointed out, do those 14/19 staff not support pardons, or hardly support them at all?

I really wouldn't see any issue with a "recommendation" of sorts that staff post on any and all pardons that they read with a support or no support once they have reached their decision. I know this was shot down some time, likely before my time, but remind me why modscore categories weren't a possibility? Like a category for reported posts, a category for Report A Scammer, a category for pardons and disputes, etc.?

 

Ive noticed the majority of staff dont participate with pardons. It's usually 5-10 who respond to the majority of pardons.

 

Pardon's aren't supposed to be handed out like candy on Halloween. If mods are not voting or posting on a pardon, there is probably a reason. I think 5 approval votes is perfectly fine.

Being a mod in the past, if anyone believed someone deserved a pardon, we made it our duty to make other mods aware. It didn't always lead to that person being pardoned, but it did raise awareness.

I personally think too many have been pardoned as it is and I hope the system doesn't make it easier.

 

I still don't see an issue with posting on the pardon saying "no support" if you've at least read it. That way it indicates you're active and reading the pardons, as opposed to no one knowing if you are or aren't.

 

I still don't see an issue with posting on the pardon saying "no support" if you've at least read it. That way it indicates you're active and reading the pardons, as opposed to no one knowing if you are or aren't.

I agree with you. Perhaps some mods would rather say nothing than to upset someone with a denial.

 

I agree with you. Perhaps some mods would rather say nothing than to upset someone with a denial.

I mean they're pardoning. They need to face the reality they'll likely be denied lol

 

[Superfluous]

I still don't see an issue with posting on the pardon saying "no support" if you've at least read it. That way it indicates you're active and reading the pardons, as opposed to no one knowing if you are or aren't.

i still really like the "pardons stay open until they get 5 supports or 5 no supports, and all votes have to be public" system for this reason, but alas, no such luck

 

[deadmou5e]

I still don't see an issue with posting on the pardon saying "no support" if you've at least read it. That way it indicates you're active and reading the pardons, as opposed to no one knowing if you are or aren't.

i agree completely, what's the point of ignoring. do the work that comes with your position, shouldn't wait on other people to wrap it up so you don't have to post

 

i still really like the "pardons stay open until they get 5 supports or 5 no supports, and all votes have to be public" system for this reason, but alas, no such luck

Seems like a perfectly reasonable idea. Likely a good reason as to why it was denied. But it'd be nice to have staff at least post on every pardon they read. Whether it's a "support" "no support" or "abstain". Would bolster activity.

 

[Owen]

I thought pardons were done primarily to make people pay back, and if there's a true belief the person has changed; an unban too.

It shouldn't be made easy, or easier.

 

[Variously]

I thought pardons were done primarily to make people pay back, and if there's a true belief the person has changed; an unban too.

It shouldn't be made easy, or easier.

The only justification to make pardons easier is if it would increase the amount of people who pay back scam victims while not allowing scammers to slip back onto the site. I don't see any suggestions in this thread that really do that and don't really believe there's much that could even do that.

There's no reason to make pardons more convenient/accessible to those that are banned because they are the ones asking for a second chance; it's already really forgiving that the pardon system exists at all.

 

[Owen]

The only justification to make pardons easier is if it would increase the amount of people who pay back scam victims while not allowing scammers to slip back onto the site. I don't see any suggestions in this thread that really do that and don't really believe there's much that could even do that.

There's no reason to make pardons more convenient/accessible to those that are banned because they are the ones asking for second chance; it's already really forgiving that the pardon system exists at all.

Yes, but people have to pay back in order to pardon. Therefore, to even get the chance, everything has to be paid back. I think the system is good atm, it's hard to get pardoned, but if somebody really wanted to change and re-join for the better; they would pay and then pardon, regardless of whether or not they will be unbanned. If somebody won't pay back, because it's hard to pardon, they shouldn't be given the chance to be unbanned..