[tooki]

Hi folks,

Just letting you know that we're still just getting the hang of the new infractions system, and are still configuring it and all, so don't be alarmed if some people are given infractions while others are given PM warnings, etc.

The idea, though, is that it'll provide a way for us to quantify misbehavior, keep track of repeat offenders, and even have the system auto-ban based on the number and severity of various infractions. It should ultimately provide much more of the "consistency" some people have asked for repeatedly.

tooki

[turtle777]

Once in place, will there be an explanation how it works, how it is triggered etc.

Also, can the user check on numbers of infractions and expiration dates ?

-t

[subego]

Originally Posted by tooki 

quantify misbehavior

[Rumor]

It seems to be working on my end.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by what_the_heck 

Once in place, will there be an explanation how it works, how it is triggered etc.

Also, can the user check on numbers of infractions and expiration dates ?

-t

Yes, I think it's entirely reasonable for us to lay out the infraction system to the user once we've hashed it out.

I honestly don't know how infractions appear to the user. I'll have to create a "regular user" account to play with.

tooki

[Rumor]

Looks like this

http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f2...j/untitled.jpg

[turtle777]

Dude, tooki is gonna give you the next infraction for that pic

Bu thanks for sacrificing yourself for the purpose of educating us.

-t

[Rumor]

Then I can show what two look like.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Then I can show what two look like.

LOL, yeah, I can see my infraction, too.

Mine is a constant reminder of SillyNN.

-t

[tooki]

Well, FWIW, the system will not let us give multiple infractions for the same post.

tooki

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by tooki 

Well, FWIW, the system will not let us give multiple infractions for the same post.

No double jeopardy ?

What if you repost exactly the same thing ? A new post ?

-t

[mac128k-1984]

Originally Posted by tooki 

Yes, I think it's entirely reasonable for us to lay out the infraction system to the user once we've hashed it out.

Wouldn't it be better and more equitable to roll it out after you hashed out the system? I cannot speak for 'NN but in my company we get everything in place before rolling out new product or an enhancement and since will (or could) cause people to be banned it would seem to me that you guys should probably get your rules ironed out before apply those rules.

[tooki]

Well, the infractions system came with a recent update to the vB software, and some mods started using it right away, before we ever got around to deciding anything.

tooki

[mac128k-1984]

Too bad, its nice to present a united front,

I think its a great idea though and should definitely bring equity in dealing with people/posts.

[tooki]

Above all, it automatically tracks warnings/infractions against a user, regardless of which mod/admin applied it. In the past, we've had to manually communicate (mostly via a thread in the mods forum) what we've done with each user.

tooki

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by tooki 

Above all, it automatically tracks warnings/infractions against a user, regardless of which mod/admin applied it. In the past, we've had to manually communicate (mostly via a thread in the mods forum) what we've done with each user.

That's nice.

What are you going to do with all the extra time ?

-t

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by what_the_heck 

That's nice.

What are you going to do with all the extra time ?

-t

Forum redesign?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

Forum redesign?

You mean tracking down Effgee ?

-t

[tooki]

Originally Posted by Dakar� 

Forum redesign?

Hah. If that were up to us forum folks (and we were paid to do all that work) we'd have had it done years ago. I honestly cannot understand why, or how, this has taken so long without it getting done. It boggles the mind.

tooki

[marden]

What about when mods take advantage of their position to harass posters?

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

Dear marden,

You have received an infraction at MacNN Forums.

https://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?p=3210121

Reason: Political Lounge Rule Violation
-------
This is a classic rule 8 violation. Please avoid posting lengthy articles via copy 'n' paste and use your own words instead.

Oreo
-------

This infraction is worth 1 point(s) and may result in restricted access until it expires. Serious infractions will never expire.

All the best,
MacNN Forums

I am reminded of what it was like driving through a little Southern town with "Yankee" license plates and long hair and having the local cop stop me and hassle me and I wound up in jail for the night until I could post $250 bail the next day.

He was a petty little tyrant who couldn't be touched so he was able to screw with whomever he wanted and no one did anything about him because he always was able to make it look like he was acting within the boundaries of the law.

In the post for which he gave me an infraction (above) he is mistaken. I gave my opinion at the bottom of the post. Is he unable to discern that? If so then maybe he shouldn't be a mod at all.

[Rumor]

I have to agree with Marden. He did post his opinion not once but twice.

Originally Posted by marden

Just be patient. Do nothing. Don't upset the natural progression. Let it happen. Deny there is a problem from Jihadists. Assume a low profile. Await the collapse of America.

Originally Posted by marden

I think he's right. America does appear to be disappearing from the hearts of many Americans. We should just follow his advice. Do nothing and wait for the collapse.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

I have to agree with Marden. He did post his opinion not once but twice.

Almost as much as anyone here, Rumor has been my debating nemesis. For him to stand up for the principle of fairness on MY behalf says quite a bit.

About the situation.

About him as a person.

WOW!

Thanks Rumor!

After this has all blown over I hope we can return to our spirited antagonism.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Rumor 

I have to agree with Marden. He did post his opinion not once but twice.

Indeed. I think Oreo knee-jerked in this case.

Marden deserves an apology over that one.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Indeed. I think Oreo knee-jerked in this case.

Marden deserves an apology over that one.

I would settle for him obeying the rules and acting impartially with all posters no matter what their point of views. If he simply goes forth and sins no more that would be enough for me and hopefully would satisfy anyone else who might have been a victim of his antics.

If he silently seethes and waits for just the right opportunity to pounce on me then I would suggest his penalty be de-throning and being allowed to answer in open forum for that hypothetical occurence.

Like being thrown to the Christians and the lions and given the opportunity to defend himself on a level playing field.

I'm not one to hold grudge, usually.

So let's all just forget about this and I promise to play nice with him if he will just leave me alone.

If I violate the rules he should treat me as he would anyone else. If I don't violate the rules he should leave me alone.

Is that too much to ask?

I hope not.

As for me this case is now closed.

[Kevin]

We all make mistakes. Not one of us is perfect. What separates us is our ability to admit such, and make good when we do.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

We all make mistakes. Not one of us is perfect. What separates us is our ability to admit such, and make good when we do.

[reader50]

Ok guys, settle down. Our latest conspiracy isn't up and running yet, so no need to get excited.

Since we are still hashing out how the infractions work, I doubt any of the triggers are set. So the points shouldn't do anything today.

[subego]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

Dear marden,

[OreoCookie]

First of all, I think it's bad manners to just post parts of the exchange, especially since you have forwarded at least some of our messages to selected individuals via pm anyway (which is fine by me). Second of all, you make it sound like I have some grudge against you, that you are the victim of continued abuse of power by me -- which is not the case. I have never closed a thread by you, I have never threatened you nor sent you any pms prior to this infraction. Yet, you get all worked up about me `waiting for the right opportunity to pounce you'. I assure you, I have better things to do. Leave your hyperbole out of this.

Since there seems to be some questions as to why I've sent this infraction, I want to quickly state why I chose to send an infraction (not a ban, nothing, marden has -- in the worst case -- just received an infraction when it's not even clear what criteria we should use to ban someone based on infractions alone).

Before the conception of the PL and shortly thereafter, there were good and original discussions about all kinds of political topics. Both sides had good people, SimeyTheLimey, Captain Kangaroo, vmarks and some others come to mind. Some of these people still occasionally post here today, but truth to be told, most of them don't. I think the most telling difference between the PL back then and now is the signal-to-noise ratio: back then, people linked to articles in their lengthy replies, nowadays, people seem to be content to post lengthy articles and give brief replies. That's why at one point we (as in MacNN, not me personally, I think that was even before me becoming a mod) introduced Rule #8 to try and reduce the number of those threads where the original content to copy 'n' paste ratio is off. Most of these threads quickly degenerate into flamewars … However, since the PL has always been modded lighthandedly (which is not a bad thing in itself), I think Rule #8 has not been enforced as such.

Marden is one of the persons where this ratio is off. For example in his thread on Al Quaeda's endorsement of the Democrats in the November elections, his only sentence was `Now, let's watch and see if Pelosi and Murtha and Co. continue to please al Qaeda's leadership.' Here, his original contribution is one measly sentence -- not a lot compared to the article, and with no original content whatsoever. There are many similar examples, so I have decided to sent marden an infraction, because I knew it would have no immediate consequences, but still bring my point across (marden, feel free to discuss that with me in private). It's not surprising to me that among the first responses to my infraction was that my actions were politically motivated (which they are not) -- a point which can be discussed ad nauseum. Let me say this, though: I'd prefer an good discussion with a political opponent than a discussion with someone who is more in line with what I believe.

My hope is that people would start posting links to articles again so that the copied articles don't cover the paucity of their own words anymore. That people take their time to write original posts again which is more than the recap of one article they have just read. If they have something to say, they should say it in their own words and still give the interested person the opportunity to read the original stories.


So my point is this:

(1) Marden has not been sanctioned in any way nor was it my intention to sanction him.
(2) I have not insulted marden neither publicly nor privately on this forum.
(3) I don't have a hidden agenda to hunt him down (to `pounce him').
(4) His right to free speech hasn't been infringed upon (so much for using `every legal [sic] and morally supportable tactic available to get [me] to desist').
(5) I haven't used infractions before: in my opinion, infractions can also be used to point the mods of that particular forum to potential violations of forum rules. So I did not intend to have the `last word' on it anyway (since I don't moderate the PL).
(6) The PL could use fresh blood and an adherence to previous standards of discussion.

So overall, I don't understand the fuzz that some people here make of it: nobody got hurt, nobody is the target of some conspiracy to curb his rights to express himself on these forums and I'm not the rampaging mod that some people perceive me to be.

Gotta work now … 

[Kevin]

Um the PL has ALWAYS been a cesspool, and the signal to noise ration has been the same.

The reason the PL was made in the first place was because of obnoxious threads that were redundant.

For example 5 different threads bashing Bush that basically said the same thing.

I was around when the PL was formed, and I don't remember such a PL you are describing.

And the Rule8 violation rule was started when Logic started complaining about vmarks posts. Which was basically just a petty way of trying to get vmarks to not be allowed to post in the PL.


Oreo the reason why people think your call was invalid was the thread you called him out on. He didn't break the rule in said thread.

There is no arguing that.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Um the PL has ALWAYS been a cesspool, and the signal to noise ration has been the same.

I beg to differ, just do a search for SimeyTheLimey and take a look at the discussions he participated in: big difference. Sadly, many of the good people have left the PL or MacNN for good.

Originally Posted by Kevin 

And the Rule8 violation rule was started when Logic started complaining about vmarks posts. Which was basically just a petty way of trying to get vmarks to not be allowed to post in the PL.

Which changes the situation how?

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Oreo the reason why people think your call was invalid was the thread you called him out on. He didn't break the rule in said thread.

There is no arguing that.

That's exactly what I am arguing: five consecutive posts of his were mostly copy 'n' paste. And no, I don't think `I hope this amuses you, then.' squeezed in between the previous poster's commend and an article is not stating an opinion. Furthermore, I've decided the send this infraction not just for his behavior in this single thread, but that's the way marden consistently posts in the PL.

IMO he did break the rules. We can agree to disagree on that, I have no problem with that.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

I beg to differ, just do a search for SimeyTheLimey and take a look at the discussions he participated in: big difference. Sadly, many of the good people have left the PL or MacNN for good.

Simey I agree. He has always been a good poster. I am talking OVER ALL. The PL OVER ALL has always been the same.

Which changes the situation how?

Just stating the REASON it was added was different from your reason. And it was a pretty silly reason AND rule.

People can simply make up some insincere excuse for a reply just to get past it.

I think rule 8 violations since not really HURTING anyone shouldn't even take a whole point.

That's exactly what I am arguing: five consecutive posts of his were mostly copy 'n' paste.

So? If it handles what he wants to say in response why does it matter?

I suggest marden, that you just stop putting the text in quotes.

Furthermore, I've decided the send this infraction not just for his behavior in this single thread, but that's the way marden consistently posts in the PL.

Sounds like an afterthought to me. As you never said any such thing in your original msg to him.

IMO he did break the rules. We can agree to disagree on that, I have no problem with that.

Most people in this thread disagree with you it seems.

Though I have yet to see a mod admit that they ever made a bad decision. That either means that the mods are infallible, or mods here simple don't admit when they are wrong.

You choose.

I've surely never seen an apology by mods that have used poor judgement.

If marden was posting leftist shills he would have never been reported. And this wouldn't have been an issue.

Just like vmarks. Had he been posting anti-Israel posts there would have never been a rule 8.

If what someone is posting isn't hurting or attacking someone in someway, it shouldn't be a problem at all.

This is just petty.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Just stating the REASON it was added was different from your reason. And it was a pretty silly reason AND rule.

So you have a problem with Rule 8 and the way it came to be? Fine by me. Still, it's a rule (and as I said, I have had no involvement in its creation) and we ask people to abide by the rules.

If you (= not just you personally) have a problem with PL Rule 8, then ask the relevant mods to change it. Otherwise, stick to it.

Originally Posted by Kevin 

I think rule 8 violations since not really HURTING anyone shouldn't even take a whole point.

So you admit it was a rule 8 violation?
It seems you have a problem with Rule 8 per se, so you should take up the argument with someone else (i. e. one of the PL mods). That's all I can and will say about this.

Originally Posted by Kevin 

I suggest marden, that you just stop putting the text in quotes.

Plagiarism is not the solution either. It's in the best case circumventing the rules.

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Sounds like an afterthought to me. As you never said any such thing in your original msg to him.

It wasn't an afterthought. (Also, marden has already received three other infractions, three of them active.)

Originally Posted by Kevin 

I've surely never seen an apology by mods that have used poor judgement.

I have no problem apologizing if I have made a mistake. I don't think it's one of those times, though.

Originally Posted by Kevin 

If marden was posting leftist shills he would have never been reported. And this wouldn't have been an issue.

The PL's mods keep people from both sides under watch -- and we do have mods from both sides of the aisle on the team. Also, if what you say about the conception of Rule 8 is true, then your own words prove you wrong. The mods act on both sides' BS. Since you also don't know what I do or do not report, you should refrain from baseless accusations. The reason why others haven't received infractions from me is because the system of infractions has been introduced just recently and I wanted to see how it works.

[Kevin]

Uh you took my post totally wrong.

My points still stand. Nothing is different now, than then. Actually the PL was WORSE when it first started than it is now.

And alot of those rules wouldn't exist if it wasn't for partisan people attempting to silence those they want gone.

Again, I feel the mods should concern themselves more about attacks and rudness and worry less about the petty inane stuff.

[Dakar²]

I disagree. Back when I joined in '04 it was from lurking in the PL. The signal-to-noise ratio is much worse. Discussions were just as heated back then, but for all the sniping that occurred there was a good amount of lengthy posts that counter-acted that.

Nowadays? Not so much.

[Dork.]

If I can insert my unsolicited $.02 here, I think this infractions business, while it was started with good intentions, is not going to work out well at all.

tooki has stated that people have asked for "consistency", and this system will attempt to provide it. But I would like to respectfully submit that people in general will always have a skewed concept of "fairness", and will always percieve bias even when none is actually present. For Big Issues like legal matters, we (as a society) have a moral obligation to be fair, so we appoint Arbiters of Fairness (like judges) and expect them to follow precise rules (like laws).

But for small issues like Internet Fora, I don't think it's worth it. Every single moderator action is subject to scrutiny, and there will be some people who will attach malice to any acton on the part of authority (if a moderator on an Internet Forum can be considered authority) they do not like. Far from trying to enforce consistency and fairness, this infractions system will only serve to make people believe that the system is grossly unfair, because every time something happens that they don't agree with, no matter how big or small, they will whine about it. And one thing we can all agree on is that the infractions system will increase the number of documented moderator actions: that's its' purpose, after all. It's not a matter of how objectively fair each instance is: every moderator action will provoke an unequal and over-the-top reaction. It's just how the Internet works. Think of the most annoying, pedantic guy in your high school class. Now think about the fact that every high school class throughout history had at least one of them, and they all know how to use the Internet. Sometimes, it seems like they're all here....

In spite of all this, there are certain rules we can all agree on (quashing spam, for instance). But in my view, any moderator action tends to ruffle some feathers, even if it is entirely appropriate. Moderators should focus on the big things, and leave the small things alone. They will sort themselves out. Eventually, if a hands-off approach is adopted for a while, you'll see members start to take more ownership of the place and police the nonsense themselves.

[Kevin]

Again, there has as far I know been not one mod ever back down, or apologize for wrong-doing.

This either means the mods have never been wrong in the 7 or so years this forum has been around, or they simply don't admit to such thing, and spin.

This makes the mods seem unhuman.

I think this reason above is why mods and admins have been scrutinized in the past, and the present.

[Dork.]

You want to see unhuman mods? Go to that NotNN place (wherever it lives on the Internet now.) I think one of their moderators is a real, live wombat (who likes ointment)!

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by tooki 

Hah. If that were up to us forum folks (and we were paid to do all that work) we'd have had it done years ago. I honestly cannot understand why, or how, this has taken so long without it getting done. It boggles the mind.

tooki

Well, I was joking, but thanks anyway.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

In spite of all this, there are certain rules we can all agree on (quashing spam, for instance). But in my view, any moderator action tends to ruffle some feathers, even if it is entirely appropriate. Moderators should focus on the big things, and leave the small things alone. They will sort themselves out. Eventually, if a hands-off approach is adopted for a while, you'll see members start to take more ownership of the place and police the nonsense themselves.

Compared to a great many forums, we're VERY hands-off. And I think it shows: we've been hemorrhaging good members, and whiny miscreants have filled their places. Why? Because smart people who want to have smart discussions don't like having to wade through the morass of impertinent, childish oafs that now dominate, and the posts they leave behind. It's become impossible to hold sensible conversations here, because somebody will always derail it with a personal grudge, rather than discuss the topic.

I am hoping that this system will make us more effective at identifying people who don't stand out like sore thumbs, but nonetheless cause problems, and I have full intent to encourage wide use of the infractions system for minor things, issuing low-points infractions for the everyday improprieties that have dragged this place down. The great advantage of the infractions is that they no longer require a particular mod to track a poster's behavior: any mod who sees it can issue an infraction, so in the end, all the mods can contribute towards identifying problem users.

I will emphasize that the infractions system does not allow multiple infractions to be issued on a single post, so you can't be punished multiple times by different mods.

tooki

[Demonhood]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

The reason the PL was made in the first place was because of obnoxious threads that were redundant.

not entirely. enough political threads grew out of the lead-up to the war that it deserved it's own sub-forum.

And the Rule8 violation rule was started when Logic started complaining about vmarks posts. Which was basically just a petty way of trying to get vmarks to not be allowed to post in the PL.

err, no. there were quite a few people that would post and run, intending to sit back and watch the flamefest that ensued. it had nothing to do with logic and vmarks. reminder: i wrote the rule.

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Again, there has as far I know been not one mod ever back down, or apologize for wrong-doing.

then you have a terrible memory. there have been several instances of mods/admins reversing a ban, undeleting a thread, apologizing for mistakes, etc.

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by tooki 

Compared to a great many forums, we're VERY hands-off. And I think it shows: we've been hemorrhaging good members, and whiny miscreants have filled their places. Why? Because smart people who want to have smart discussions don't like having to wade through the morass of impertinent, childish oafs that now dominate, and the posts they leave behind. It's become impossible to hold sensible conversations here, because somebody will always derail it with a personal grudge, rather than discuss the topic.

I am hoping that this system will make us more effective at identifying people who don't stand out like sore thumbs, but nonetheless cause problems, and I have full intent to encourage wide use of the infractions system for minor things, issuing low-points infractions for the everyday improprieties that have dragged this place down. The great advantage of the infractions is that they no longer require a particular mod to track a poster's behavior: any mod who sees it can issue an infraction, so in the end, all the mods can contribute towards identifying problem users.

I will emphasize that the infractions system does not allow multiple infractions to be issued on a single post, so you can't be punished multiple times by different mods.

tooki

Maybe my misunderstanding here is whether this infraction system means that there will simply be better measurement of existing problem posts, or whether it means there will be more problem posts flagged. If it facilitates communications among moderators regarding things that they've always wanted to enforce but haven't had the bandwidth to, that's great.

But I just want to offer the notion that an overall increase in moderator action will not necessarily be connected to "fairness" or "consistency", because all some people will see is more negative attention that they are incapable of believing they've earned.

Just like very often, in the PL, the definition of Middle Class is "anyone who makes as much as I do", and the definition of Rich is "anyone who makes more than I do".

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Demonhood 

not entirely. enough political threads grew out of the lead-up to the war that it deserved it's own sub-forum.

The forum was started because people came into this part of the forum and complained about the redundant and over-abundance of political threads. Yes indeed this is what happened. This problem started before the war.
I was one of the many people that did complain. Certain anti-Bush zealots couldn't stop making redunant anti-Bush posts. While there was others that CONTRIBUTED that weren't anti-Bushies, the actual problem of said threads being created was not caused by them.

No amount of history rewriting or denial will change that. The fact that we didn't even NEED a political lounge before the 2000-2001 elections also goes to prove that.

I know how you have a history of totally denying this ever happened Demon. Attempting to make it looke more evenally distrubuted by both sides. But it simply was not that way.

err, no. there were quite a few people that would post and run, intending to sit back and watch the flamefest that ensued. it had nothing to do with logic and vmarks. reminder: i wrote the rule.

You may have wrote the rule, but the REASON it was even BROUGHT UP was because of the logic/vmarks incident. I remember said incident. And so does two other mods I recently spoke with about it.
So they seem to have a different memory of it than you as well.

then you have a terrible memory. there have been several instances of mods/admins reversing a ban, undeleting a thread, apologizing for mistakes, etc.

I have seen a few mods decisions over-turned by other mods. But I have yet to see any mod go "I apologize, I am sorry, bad decision"

I take that back, I think I saw Mill do that once.

If there were more I would love to see these instances.

More often than not, the mod or admin just pulls rank and starts banning anyone that disagrees with the action with "Anymore msgs about this will get you banned"

You can't deny that hasn't happened.

Until recently accountability of the mods was pretty much ingored.

This lead to people getting banned without givin a reason. Often when asked said mod would say "You did something wrong, I am not wasting my time looking up the exact instance"

I've gotten a few of those myself.

There was a time when I got banned by a mod/admin and it was over-turned later that day. Not one peep did I hear from said mod or admin of wrong doing.

[Demonhood]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

The forum was started because people came into this part of the forum and complained about the redundant and over-abundance of political threads. Yes indeed this is what happened. This problem started before the war.
I was one of the many people that did complain. Certain anti-Bush zealots couldn't stop making redunant anti-Bush posts. While there was others that CONTRIBUTED that weren't anti-Bushies, the actual problem of said threads being created was not caused by them.

No amount of history rewriting or denial will change that. The fact that we didn't even NEED a political lounge before the 2000-2001 elections also goes to prove that.

I know how you have a history of totally denying this ever happened Demon. Attempting to make it looke more evenally distrubuted by both sides. But it simply was not that way.

i'm not sure what you're smoking, but i never brought up anything about SIDES. i never mentioned political affiliations. i'm not sure why you're insisting on placing "blame" for the PL on the other side. quite a few people complained that we were simply bowing to pressure from one side in order to suppress theirs. that entire argument never made much sense to me. we just didn't want any more political threads eating up space in the normal lounge (regardless of their political bent).

the fact remains that the idea of a political sub-forum was floated almost exactly one month before the war began. i made it on February 23rd, 2003 and made it public on March 23, 2003. i made it because gorg brought the idea to my attention, and i had noticed an increased amount of threads of a political language in the lead-up to the war (which makes sense). so please, stop telling me why i do the things i do.

You may have wrote the rule, but the REASON it was even BROUGHT UP was because of the logic/vmarks incident. I remember said incident. And so does two other mods I recently spoke with about it.

they might have had an "incident", but it wasn't the primary reason i wrote the rule. or are you trying to suggest i wrote it in there to quiet vmarks' opinions? because that would be particularly hilarious.

</end PL tangent>
------------

i see the infraction system as a sort of replacement for the PMs we mods/admins regularly have to write to warn people about their behavior. it's less time consuming and there's a record of what is dealt out and when. this makes it much easier to track who has been doing what and whether or not a particular member has ever been warned before.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Demonhood 

i'm not sure what you're smoking, but i never brought up anything about SIDES. i never mentioned political affiliations.

You have in the past. You've corrected me many times when I claimed the reason people were complaining was all the redundant anti-Bush threads. You made sure to "correct" me on many occasion and tell me that wasn't the case.

And really "I don't know what you are smoking" is that needed ?

i'm not sure why you're insisting on placing "blame" for the PL on the other side.

I am not insisting anything. I am just stating the facts. You have insisted that it simply wasn't that way on many occasion. Why? I have no idea.

quite a few people complained that we were simply bowing to pressure from one side in order to suppress theirs. that entire argument never made much sense to me.

I am not talking about that. I am talking about why that part of the forum was made. What caused it.

we just didn't want any more political threads eating up space in the normal lounge (regardless of their political bent).

Again, not claiming you had a political bent.

the fact remains that the idea of a political sub-forum was floated almost exactly one month before the war began.

Complaints about political threads that filled the lounge started before that. It wasn't till the war started did the anti-Bush threads get to be so redundant that there was no other alternative.

i made it on February 23rd, 2003 and made it public on March 23, 2003. i made it because gorg brought the idea to my attention, and i had noticed an increased amount of threads of a political language in the lead-up to the war (which makes sense). so please, stop telling me why i do the things i do.

I am not telling you why YOU did things. I am telling you WHY people complained. And WHAT caused said complaint, which indeed did cause the PL to be formed. Whether that was the reason YOU did it or not.

they might have had an "incident", but it wasn't the primary reason i wrote the rule.

I am not saying that is why you wrote the rule. I am saying that that is what led up to the rule being even thought about. That if the constant complaints of vmarks posting said type of threads led up to it. And indeed it did. My point was if such partisan complaining did not happen, and that is what it was, partisan complaining, it would have never been a rule. IMHO of course. So would a lot of these rules.

or are you trying to suggest i wrote it in there to quiet vmarks' opinions? because that would be particularly hilarious.

Of course not. I wouldn't even begin to think of such a thing. Nor did I claim as much.

[angaq0k]

I think it is great. But is there one system more efficient than another? Probably not.

Personally, as long as there is a system, and that the mod perceive it as something that can be improved over time, this is good. The fact there is a forum for feedback is already a good, very good thing; that way inconsistencies can be communicated openly and debated. There are other fora where this does not even exist.

That is why I like it here.

Thanks.

[Kevin]

And I agree with ang. This is a step in the right direction.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

I have seen a few mods decisions over-turned by other mods. But I have yet to see any mod go "I apologize, I am sorry, bad decision"

I take that back, I think I saw Mill do that once.

So never now became once.

Originally Posted by Kevin 

This lead to people getting banned without givin a reason. Often when asked said mod would say "You did something wrong, I am not wasting my time looking up the exact instance"

Without giving a reason? More like without accepting the reason given.

Originally Posted by Kevin 

I am not saying that is why you wrote the rule. I am saying that that is what led up to the rule being even thought about. That if the constant complaints of vmarks posting said type of threads led up to it. And indeed it did. My point was if such partisan complaining did not happen, and that is what it was, partisan complaining, it would have never been a rule. IMHO of course. So would a lot of these rules.
Of course not. I wouldn't even begin to think of such a thing. Nor did I claim as much.

The fairy tale of political bias again. Do me a favor and ask marden who he got the other infractions from. You'll find out that they are split evenly. So please stop the perpetuation of the myth that your side is constantly at a disadvantage, because of `MacNN's political stance'.

[residentEvil]

okay; can this be closed now? since sticking to the topic is also a rule and it seems that isn't being followed. member/mod arguing in threads is getting old too. they jump in and derail the original topic just to air their dirty laundry.

it's going to be a second page soon on the Infraction system; and most of this thread has nothing to do with it.

It is so nice to see how members know all, mods can't admit they are wrong and some people just can't let **** go.

As for the Infraction system; I think it is more of a private (to the user only) thread ranking/thumbs down for their post. If we can't have a public thread/user voting system, then a private one shouldn't be in place either. Basically, it's a mods way of giving a thumbs down for you post.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

So never now became once.

Yes see, I forgot and remembered. I admitted I was wrong. I often do that when I come to understand I am not right about something.

Without giving a reason? More like without accepting the reason given.

No, just as I said. Not given a reason. While it didn't happen frequently, it DID happen.

The fairy tale of political bias again.

Read what I am saying please. I am not saying the mods made any political bias in that instance. I said the reason the COMPLAINT was made was because of political bias. Not the reason the RULE was made.

Do me a favor and ask marden who he got the other infractions from. You'll find out that they are split evenly. So please stop the perpetuation of the myth that your side is constantly at a disadvantage, because of `MacNN's political stance'.

I am not perpetuating any myth. I request you read my post more carefully, and not knee-jerk and accuse me of doing or saying something I simply am not.

And please don't reply to this somehow shifting the blame of your not reading my post carefully on me.

I am not really even talking about the mods in that instant. In most instances actually. So why you guys are taking it so personally is beyond me.

The only thing I said about mods was the whole never admitting to wrong doing.

Of course that is just my opinion. One that however, isn't a rare in this forum.

And by saying that, I am not saying you guys are horrible awful people.

Not at all.