Guybrush

I don't get it. A speeding ticket has consequences in that you have to pay it. An infraction times out on its own after 10 days or so. If it wasn't the one that put you over the magic amount, it functions more as a warning that getting more of them within that timespan can carry consequences. On it's own, it does very little.

That's why I'm proposing members need to change the way they think about punishment and infractions and more see it as a measure of how much freedom they have. You can get infractions - that's fine. Just be aware that you'll get tempbanned if you get too many too quickly.

__________________
Something Completely Different

Oriphiel

An infraction has consequences in that you're basically on probation, and anything you do can send you over the limit. You reform your behavior to make extra sure that nothing you post can possibly be taken the wrong way. Just likes with a fine, if you have only one than it's a minor annoyance. But the more tickets and citations you get, the closer you get to having to take a driving class or having your license suspended (being temporarily banned). They seem pretty similar to me.

The Batlord

Perhaps a regular course of drug therapy, or a relatively noninvasive lobotomy would help.

__________________

WWWP

Tore, I think this system would benefit the community immensely, for what it's worth, but I don't foresee it being implemented.

__________________

#DEMODFROWNLAND
#TERMLIMITSFORMODERATORS

Guybrush

Similar in that respect, perhaps. But if I get a speeding ticket, what I worry about is the amount of money that I have to pay. I mean, that's really the main thing about speeding tickets - they cost money - and this aspect is pretty much non-existent with infractions. 50 speeding tickets will cost you. 50 infractions won't necessarily cost you a thing. So, in practice, the two are quite different.

Edit :

Thanks WWWP

I believe in it, so I feel like I gotta try (again).

__________________
Something Completely Different

VEGANGELICA

I support your suggestion that the mods try using, for a month, a more consistent, predictable infractions system to deal with situations where members break the rules that MB already has.

The debate isn't whether mods should use infractions...they already do...but about the details of how and when they use them.

There would be no harm in trying out a more predictable system of rule enforcement for a month and then have us all reconvene to hear what members and mods thought about it. We could then decide whether we want to revert to the current, more loosely moderated system where threads more frequently get closed or abandoned due to going off-topic in silliness or personal fights, and members leave due to the frustration of personal attacks and bickering.

To those who said that MB members are capable of policing themselves: the proposed variation of the infractions system shouldn't bother anyone or infringe on their posting style, because MB members will already be behaving themselves according to the community rules.

Like Tore said, giving small infractions that last a short time for rule-breaking such as personal attacks, but that add up if someone breaks the rules too often, doesn't completely squelch comments such as "you're an *******" but does put a cap on how unruly fights and threads get at MB, since if a member continues to make personal putdowns or post off-topic posts, she'll get longer and more lasting consequences.

I encourage the mods and members to agree to give the proposed infractions system a try for a month. It could very well improve the "culture" here for those members who don't thrive in a place where they can get repeatedly put down personally for sharing their opinions, or where threads contain a lot of off-topic banter.

* * *

I agree with all of these reasons Tore gives for the benefits of our trying out a new variation of our current infractions system:

^ Yes, yes, and yes.

* * *

The problem is that people have gotten hurt emotionally here at MB quite badly due to members jumping on them, putting them down, mocking them.

And threads do get derailed by off-topic comments, which can be funny to an extent, but also can cause frustration to those who want threads to focus on the chosen topic and not digress entirely into discussions of something else.

A more consistent method of infractions would, I feel, help mods and the community still have fun, free-spirited conversations, but with fewer digressions and personal attacks.

__________________

Guybrush

Erica gets it. Thank you so much for your support

__________________
Something Completely Different

Janszoon

Yes, you can do custom infractions. But having to do custom infractions which contradict the existing system every single time feels like it goes against the very premise of your proposal.

My comments about enforcement of the short posts rule were meant as an example of the issues I see with your proposal. I actually think there are good reasons to keep that rule, but that's a side issue, my main point is simply that, like a lot of rules, it's very context dependent. The issue of context is not a minor thing, it's a fundamental point about the nature of rule enforcement which you and I disagree on. I think taking a one size fits all approach which disregards context actually leads to unfair rule enforcement and generates more animosity because people get upset about the thoughtlessness of the way the rule is being enforced. As others have pointed out, it also doesn't really make sense on a board this size because the mods, for better or worse, are also active members of the site, not dispassionate third parties as they might be on, say, the comments section of a major news outlet's website.

I think, by and large, people get upset when their hand gets slapped. So setting up a situation where mods are slapping hands more often is going to generate more animosity, not less. Plus, it's still going to require the kind of human judgement that you want to eliminate because mods will still have to decide what constitutes an insult, what constitutes trolling, etc. That situation seems like it will be more hassle, the end result of which will only be more headaches for everyone involved. Doesn't seem worth it at all.

On a side note, sorry it took me so long to respond, this week was my last week at my job so I was trying to squeeze a thoughtful response to your comments in between wrapping up projects, attending farewell events, and preparing for my new job.

__________________
A Night in the Life of the Invisible Man

Time & Place

25 Albums You Should Hear Before the Moon Crashes into the Earth and We All Die

last.fm

Trollheart

Disclaimer: Please take into account I have only seen this thread now, it's already 14 odd pages long and I have not the time to read it all yet but wanted to give my thoughts. If these points have been addressed or raised or dealt with before, my apologies but I wanted to get this down while it's fresh in my mind. So...

This seems too draconian. I think rigidly enforcing some of the below would lead to a much less fun atmosphere and even a climate of fear, where people are afraid to say or do something in case it offends or is taken the wrong way. Batty would have to leave, and I might have to too, as often I break some of these. The ones I have a problem with I've highlighted and explained.

I don't understand this. How do infraction points decrease? How does "the total amount again come under 10"?
Highlighted in red: so, no "lol" or smileys or up yours or anything like that???

Highlighted in green: so my "album covers that would piss God off" in Metal Month II last year would be seen as breaking this rule? What about gorey metal or other album covers used in reviews? Or GIFs? Or even avatars?

Highlighted in purple: surely would result in a flood of reports, mostly nonsense, and many made to get back at someone for something?

I must admit, as a non-mod and even non-really-participating member at the moment tore, you seem determined to drag us back into the Dark Ages. What's wrong with what we have now? You may not like it but I think we generally have fun, and if anyone has a real problem they can sort it out. I'm unaware of anyone having a real issue, other than one member, who asked Urban to Warn me, he did, I took it, end of story.

If it ain't broke...

Also, rules that are too harsh are likely to turn away new members I would think.

__________________
Trollheart: Signature-free since April 2018

Guybrush

Grats on your new job, Jans, and thanks for your reply.

I feel like I should clarify again that I'm not saying there can't be context. It just shouldn't be nothing but context. If there was a general precedent that breaking rule X is penalized with 3 infractions, then that's your basic starting point. Perhaps you'd make it a 2 or a 4 - or even just a warning. The general idea and expectation is that it requires punitive action.

If there is no precedent, no guideline and no expectations, then your starting point is likely nothing. When a lack of a system allows for doing nothing, that can become pretty tempting - particularly in an environment such as this becase, as you say, mods are members of the community and so have incentive against taking punitive actions against friends. Plus, when there's no system, any mod is accountable for their own punitive actions.

I wouldn't like handing out infractions to people I like either, but it's for the good of themselves and everyone else. I compared MB to a playground with kids earlier and to use that analogy again, raising kids generally works better with some structure, rules and boundaries. Even though you don't like punishing your kids, a system of timeouts is probably better than total anarchy - for them, for you and for everyone else who spend time with you.

As I mentioned earlier, while a system calls for more punitive actions against members, it also takes responsibility away from mods because they're just doing their job. When there's no real system, mods are held accountable, creating another incentive to do nothing.

edit :

Infractions generally expire after X amount of time. So, if you break a rule, you could be punished with 3 infraction points for 10 days (ex). After those 10 days were over, and as long as you didn't earn any more infractions, you would be back at 0.

You mention that my draconian system seems like a return to the dark ages, but consistent and predictable moderation is pretty much the norm for most civilized discussion forums. I think you may be missing out on some of the philosophy behind my suggestion and what it would entail. And while you may not think MB is broke, there are many that do. Granted, they tend to leave over time.

__________________
Something Completely Different