Changes to Rule Enforcement
 

Introduction

I am proposing a new policy for rule enforcement. Some key features are :

• Equal treatment of members
• Predictable consequences for rule breaking
• Transparent rule enforcement
• Mod job is made easier by automatic creation of reports, rule enforcement records and bans

I've summarized my suggestion below in some simple points. Each point is discussed more in detail below.


Summary

The proposed policy is based on the following philosophy.

• The rules should apply equally to all
• Mods should strive to react to any instance of rule breaking
• Rule breaking should be consistently punished with temporary infractions
• Members should be informed impassionately about what rule they broke and the amount of infractions they got as a consequence

These points are discussed below under discussion.


Plan of action

The following is a proposed plan of action for implementation.

1. Bolster the mod team with more moderators
   • Ask ex-mods to come back
   • Consider members for modship
2. Mods revise the rules in cooperation with admins (Yac)
   • Update rules announcement
3. Mods determine infraction amount penalties for various instances of rule breaking
   • Penalties can be revised to fit the current infractions system OR
   • Infractions preset values can be modified to fit penalties
4. Write up guide with examples in mods forum to help mods moderate according to new system
   
5. Inform the rest of the community in a dedicated thread
   • Set a startup date
   • Possibly give weekly updates on how the new system is working, perhaps with some stats
6. On startup date and thereafter, moderate post-startup-date-posts according to new system

Discussion

The rules should apply equally to all

Noone should be allowed to break the rules more than others. To ensure fairness and justice, the rules should generally apply equally to all, whether they are old time members, newbies, moderators, etc.


Mods should strive to react to any instance of rule breaking

To discourage rule breaking, it is important that rule breaking has predictable, negative consequences. Reacting to all instances of rule breaking is also a way to promote fairness, by ensuring that all who break a rule are punished.


Rule breaking should be consistently punished with temporary infractions

Temporary infractions is a great way to punish members and especially when used consistently. Among other things, infractions have the following benefits.

• Are easily available from every post through a drop-down menu
• Automatically creates a PM to the user and a report quoting that PM for other mods to see in the mods forum
• Has the ability to give predetermined amounts of infractions as well as custom amounts
• Are generally temporary, but can also be permanent
• Infractions automatically "keep score" for moderators, meaning that if two moderators unknowingly punish the same user for two separate rule breakings, the infractions add up
• Go on a users permanent record for easy reference in the future
• Makes temp/permabans an automatic consequence of the system, removing decision making and manual action needed to ban members

Infractions are versatile and while such a system can be strict, it can also be calibrated to be lenient, allowing members to commit low levels of rule breaking without serious consequence.

Small amounts of infractions generally do little, but as they pile up, freedoms are automatically removed as the user passes certain thresholds. A user who breaks a minor rule may not suffer any true ill conseqence, but if he or she keeps it up and gains more infractions, he or she may become automatically tempbanned until the infractions time out, putting the user back under the ban threshhold.

More than just a punishment, the amount of infractions a user has can be seen as a measure of freedom. A user with 0 infractions have more freedom than a member with 6 infractions.


Members should be informed impassionately about what rule they broke and the amount of infractions they got as a consequence

Members are generally punished through infractions, not through PMs. Should a conflict arise between a mod and a user as a result of an infractions PM or similar, the mod has nothing to lose while the member has "everything" to lose. To ensure that mods do not abuse this position of power by escalating conflict to goad or troll users into breaking more rules, policy should dictate that PMs are meant to be informative and never hostile.

Angry PMs from punished users are to be expected. Moderators should generally be encouraged not to answer such PMS, or at least to do so with professionalism and good temper.

Sounds like a plan, but there could be downsides to this system. I think a discussion about it wouldn't hurt.

Oh, and I thought you should know that "Impersonating staff" is on there twice, under 3 and 10 points. (Edit: Fixed! :laughing:)

So did you update this because you feel like it's not happening? Or would you like to see it happen? What's really going on here?

I agree and thanks for the heads up! Copy & paste error corrected.

This infractions system is built into the board, but it's not being used. I've been in support of using it pretty much since I discovered it. I discovered it after I became a moderator some X amount of years ago.

I've brought it up once or twice on earlier occasions, the first time in the moderators forum. It's probably buried in the discussion thread there. Now I thought I could bring it up again.

Megalomaniac.


Ok. I was really just wondering where this came from. So are you gonna put this to a vote?

As when you proposed this when you were a mod, I see a lot of hassle and aggravation for everyone (not the least of which would be trying to get the owners of the site to change the current infraction set up) without any perceptible advantage. You even seem to acknowledge in your proposal that this would annoy a lot of members. So what's the point of it?

It sounds alright in theory, but I just don't know if it'll make things better. Either way, even if everyone voted for it and the mods decided to go ahead with it, I'd still recommend that we have a trial run first. After trying it for a week or so, we could have another vote/discussion about it.

:p:

I thought about it and decided not to. If I put up a poll, it's gonna be the first thing people see when they come to the first page. Most members don't really understand the infractions system and why it is practical and so there won't be an "educated" opinion behind their vote. One of the important reasons for this is that some of these benefits will apply to moderators and not members.

I can describe it briefly with an example in this post, though.

Examples of infractions in action

A moderator can hand a user X amount of temporary or permanent infractions. Generally they will be temporary. Let's say you have two mods and one user. Moderator A, moderator B and User DERP.

Example 1 : Mod A sees user DERP break a 5-point rule. Mod A gives a 5 point infraction which expires in a week. When Mod A does so, a report thread is made in the mods forum so that all other mods can see that this user was infracted. The infraction also goes on that users permanent record for all mods to see. This is very useful. Now, three days later, DERP breaks the same rule again and is infracted with another 5 point infraction by Mod B. This will cause DERP to have 10 infractions for the next 4 days, until the first 5 infractions "wear off". So, user DERP will be automatically tempbanned for 4 days and all this moderation will be recorded and visible to other mods in the future.

Example 2 : User DERP is so disruptive, a moderator chooses to make a 5 infractions penalty permanent. Now, DERP always has 5 infractions and thus has less leeway than other users who can behave nicely and end up back at 0 infractions.

After thinking about it, I find these proposed changes a bit strict. Most of the members here are great people who legitimately care about each other, but under those rules (where, for example, saying two stupid things in a week has the potential to get you perma banned), a lot of them would have been banned a long time ago simply for getting carried away, as we all sometimes do. As another example, a person says one stupid thing in the past, and a mod slaps a permanent infraction on them. After that, making just one mistake, even a tiny one, could push them over the limit and automatically ban them.

It's true that the current system of leniency leads to a few abrasive people running around and making trouble, but it has also allowed for us to have members who we're all better off from having met. I think that's a fair trade off. Not to mention that users who were abrasive in the past, but are now more reformed, would never have gotten the chance to change their ways under these new rules. Just my two cents on the situation.

.

It's been a while since I was mod, but I think the current infractions system that comes with the board supports my suggested implementation.

Successful implementation would change the MB environment into one which punishes rule breaking behaviour.

Initially, this would indeed cause a lot of aggravation because the current culture is one in which rule breaking is common. There would be a lot of infractions being handed out. Possibly, groups of members would try to sabotage the initiative. But - over time, people would either adjust, leave or get permbanned and the boards we're left with after that minor cataclysm would be a friendlier and more civilized place. I'm hoping some old members would return and I think the board will also appeal more to potential future members who like forums to be civilized.

So, it would cause temporary drama followed by permanent bliss.

Trial run is completely possible, but I would suggest a month at least. I don't expect implementation to go smoothly and if you only try it for a week, chances are you would get a taste of the difficult transition into this system, but not the actual benefits of being in it long-term.

It is a long term strategy.

I wrote "perm" some place where I should have written "temp". Generally speaking, the system should cause rule-breaking users to become tempbanned a lot for up to 7 days. Unless you make a habit of it, you could generally tell someone off two or three times a week without serious repercussions. And either way, you could perhaps stand to be tempbanned for a couple of days? Possibly it was worth it.

If the suggested restrictions are too hard, it's easy to lower the amount of infractions dished out.

I'm generally not in favour of permbans. Unless the user is a robot, he or she has potential for improvement. In the environment caused by successful implementation of my suggestion, unruly users would get tempbanned over and over again anyways. Chances are they wouldn't bother and would either improve or eventually leave. Hence, the need for unusual punishment should be lessened.

Members would have a lot of opportunity to change their ways, possibly even more so. There are members permbanned today that might still be around (in a reformed way) had my suggestion been implemented earlier.

One of the main appeals of Music Banter is it's "culture". There are plenty of music forums out there that are strictly moderated, if that's what people want. And to be fair, Music Banter usually isn't that bad; watch how quickly personal attacks and spam get deleted out of the main music forums.

Like I said before, a bit of drama every now and then is a trade off for the leniency that we're all usually pretty responsible about, even if a few people abuse it. I know that I and a few other posters haven't always shown that responsibility, but we're just a small handful out of the massive number of members this forum has, and punishing everyone for the mistakes of the few might just make everyone needlessly angry.

It doesn't, that's why I said it would need to be changed. There currently is a system, but the rules listed and their corresponding points don't line up to your proposal.

How would it achieve the goal you are describing? To me, handing out infractions over things like short posts would just create animosity and stifle conversation. It also serves to pretty much eliminate context on terms of rule enforcement, which I think is a bad idea. A brand new poster who only makes ten one word posts in their first week here is not the same as longtime, active member of the site who happens to make ten one word posts one week.

Agreed. Have we learned nothing from Robocop? :laughing:

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/...obocop-008.jpg

So, like, we can't all just tighten up a bit. I mean that's really all the problem is. Some posters don't know when to stop. When too much is to much I don't see the point of the infraction system that is built in to the board with no sorta discretion towards the member posting. Can't people police themselves?

Okay. I think there's a way to hand out custom infractions. I have one myself from Yac.

http://s24.postimg.org/aktsyrcol/Skjermbilde.png

Either way, it's just a suggestion. If it's not practical in its current state, perhaps a change in some of the details would help.

Possibly the short posts rule should be eliminated. It's not enforced today and so means little. You may be getting hung up on details and not seeing the bigger picture.

And yes, it does eliminate context in the most common situations. That's how it should be. You shouldn't have to treat every enforcement of a rule like it was uncharted territory and an excercise in judgment. Unusual situations should call for that and they're not going away.

Animosity would occur, but less so when people wrap their heads around this. Let's say I decide to insult someone. I know what the rules are, I know what the consequences should be, but I do it anyways. If you then infract me, I'm gonna think "fair cop". I know what I did, probably thought it was worth it and your response was predictable and already described to me in the rules.

Animosity today is generated because punishment is unpredictable and personal. My suggestion makes punishment predictable and unpersonal. Plus, getting an infraction is not the end of the world and people would still get away with things. It just puts a cap on how much of a rule breaker you can be before you disappear for a while.

No, they can't. Not really.

Let's say you have two users. One only posts long, thought out posts, but few of them. The other posts inane drivel and lots of it. These forums are made in such a way that the latter of these two users will gain lots of attention. He or she would be more visible on new posts or where have you and would have a higher post count. You would run into this person more often on average. The latter person will take over the boards.

There's a problem with forums in that the very nature of how they work rewards the posting behaviour of the second inane user more than it does the first user. To create an environment where the first user thrives as much as the second user, that requires actual effort. So, if you let things slide, they will slide.

OOooh I am trying to to screenshot my infract since we are having show and tell..


Latest Infractions Received
Post Date Expires Points Reason Posted By
Reputation 05-01-2014
09:12 AM Expired 1 Insulted Other Member(s) Urban Hat€monger ?


Meh, close enough.

How will your solution cut back on that? Unless you ban small talk in the Lounge then that's just how it's gonna be. I love you, Tore, but your utopianism gets in the way of your realism sometimes.

I like the people here, but I don't much appreciate some of the apsects of the culture. I definitely think it can improve.

Because of the way forums work, drama between two or a few users can pretty much overshadow most else that goes on. It is extremely visible and so is bad culture in general.

By the way, how is punishing someone who flames or trolls the same as punishing everyone?

I'll buy that for a dollar.

Possibly it won't. As I wrote to Jans, perhaps the short post rule should go. But whatever rules you have, it's better with consistent, predictable rule enforcement.

edit :

It's also good that other mods can see rule enforcement and that there are permanent records.

Another question. Why do you think mods will be inclined to handout infractions? Most mods still don't want to punish their friends, while they don't mind so much newbies and people they don't like.

I'm on my way to work so I'll reply to your longer post above a little later, but I'd just like to point out that we already have permanent records regardless of whether we use your infraction system so that's not really a workable argument in favor of it.

Aaaight, cool and thanks for the heads up!

Being a moderator is not (or shouldn't be) just a privilege. It's a job and a mod's job is basically to be forum police and keep law and order. Using the in-built infractions system in a consistent way is the best way to do that (imo) and so it should really be part of the job description.

Making unpopular decisions is also part of the job and when there's no clear precedent, unpopular decisions are always on you. For a recent example of this, see how Urban was recently called out for how he handled the Spill Your Guts Thread.

My suggestion makes the job simple by establishing precedent and consistency. If user breaks the rule by doing X, there's a clear precedent for how to deal with X. When the system of moderation is bigger than any one mod, it actually protects moderators by taking responsibility away from them ("sorry, but that's the job"), enabling them to enforce what would otherwise be tough decisions.

Mods would be motivated, I hope, by a realization that this way actually works and because they believe that keeping "law and order" is good for musicbanter.

So, mods will be motivated to hand out infractions because they will realize that handing out infractions works when the imaginary mods do it first?

I don't understand where you're going with this and I'm not going to speculate on why each and every mod do what they do.

But generally speaking, they may be motivated because they believe people get less burnt if it hurts every time they put their hand in the fire rather than if it hurts just sometimes.

First of all, it's very rare for there to be drama that actually bleeds into other threads. And it's even more rare for drama to enter into the music forums. Almost all of it is kept contained in the Lounge, where only people looking for off-topic discussion and letting off steam go. Like I said, these new enforcement policies would force everyone to jump through hoops, all to prevent something that is not that common, doesn't affect the main music forums, and is killed very quickly if it starts to spread.

I'll try to rephrase my point. There are only a few members who start fights, and those fights are kept in the Lounge and watched by the moderators, who step in if things get too personal. It doesn't affect most of the members, who are too busy having fun with the music forums to care, and it doesn't "overshadow" any content on Music Banter since it's carefully contained in The Lounge. People who insult others outside of the Lounge are not tolerated for very long (for example, take the recent case of GrtWhtGrvty).

This system works just fine. 90% of Music Banter is just as good as it ever was, and it remains that way no matter what happens in The Lounge. Forcing everyone to have to deal with more restrictions than ever before is not fair to them. It's not fair to them since they shouldn't be kept on a leash because of the actions of just two or three members, and it's not fair to them because the feedback you've received so far has shown that these restrictions you're proposing are neither wanted nor needed.

:laughing:

I mostly agree with Ori. In my experience, the kind of moderation you are talking about only exists on very large forums. I belong to a few, such as the Minecraft forums, where you can hardly even curse, and anything inflammatory/off topic can get you a warning. I don't mind having tight restrictions, but this forum is far to small and personal to have such a rule set.

Of course a thief may not want rules about stealing to be enforced. If you have a lawless sitaution, over time you may accumulate a lot of thieves and when the day comes for enforcing old rules, many will complain.

I still think drama and bad culture is highly visible. Threads with drama spend more time near the top of new threads. They spend more time being the thread with the latest post and I do think it spills over in other threads. Either directly or indirectly in that the tone in a drama thread sets precedent for tone in other threads. If you disagree, that's fine.

Also, part of your argument can be turned on its head. If it's only a few members who are unruly, then it's only a few that would really be affected by my suggestion. That means it's easier to implement.

I would say the current climate is a big reason why this is a small forum.

Also, what you're comparing my suggestion to sounds way more strict than what I'm proposing.

I disagree, it's small because this is a niche culture. Find me a forum with a broader music discussion than this one, and I'll probably leave. I searched around for a while before I decided on this place. There is not much to choose from.

I'll send you a PM ;)

My point is that you're claiming that mods will change how they moderate because you think this is a good idea. You've already made it clear that nobody really wants to do your suggestion, so why would they take your whole ideal to heart? They're still going to give preferential treatment to longtime members and their friends and moderate only when the situation is already off the rails.

Yes, unless I can convince them that this way is better.

The thing about me is .. I'm the most stubborn person I know. And I generally know when I'm right.

(edit :

What I'm right about in this instance that implementation of my suggestion will change the environment of MB to one with less rule-breaking. I understand many people don't want that.)

I think we have good enough mods that if the forum decided to put a new set of rules in place they would uphold them. Even if they do not like his ideas, perhaps they can come up with their own set of rules to bring some order to this place. I don't think Tore is asking too much, and even though I'd rather keep things the way they are, this is a good discussion to have.

/end thread.

Yeah, good luck with that.

Also, I'm capable of admitting that I probably(definitely) ruined threads/discussions for some people. I've also found myself annoyed when my topics get derailed by jokes/trolling, but that has never been enough to make me want to change the overall experience of the forum.