Quote:
Originally Posted by tore
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 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:
Quote:
Originally Posted by tore
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.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tore
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.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tore
I think what I'm suggesting is not harsh enough to alienate those who like the current situation (at least not most) while "strict" enough to make the site appeal to many of those who today would feel alienated by it.
|
^ Yes, yes, and yes.
* * *
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oriphiel
[...]There's nothing wrong with a playground for noisy kids. [...] We might have annoyed people, but a parent always stepped in if anyone got hurt (which is comparable to how the mods currently supervise us).
|
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.