New Policy for Rule Enforcement

[Guybrush]

I've forwarded a suggestion to adopt a new rule enforcing policy. During its discussion, it was suggested we put it up a vote to gauge where the community stands on this issue.

Before voting, please make sure you understand the basics of the infractions system and other details of the suggestion.

Are you for or against the following suggestion?


Suggestion summary

• Mod team is bolstered with additional moderators
• Outside the lounge, moderators consistently enforce rules through the use of temporary infractions
• Rules apply equally to all

Suggestion discussion and reasoning

• Implementation would happen for a trial run first (ex. 1 - 2 months) and permanently if trial was deemed successful
• The general goal of the suggestion is to prevent fights and bickering from erupting as well as create an environment where rule enforcement is treated with integrity and is predictable to our members.
• The goal is not to turn MB into a police state, nazi state, etc. Nobody wants that.
• A number of infractions are required before it has a practical effect. Hence, it generally requires several punitive actions within a specific period of time before a member's freedom is limited.
• The proposed system would be relatively forgiving in that when infractions time out, they no longer have any effect. This potentially allows for an endless amount of chances for a member to improve behaviour and regain freedom to use the boards.
• The current rules should be revised before implementation

Discuss the proposed system here.

edit :

PS! A new, more detailed poll has since been created as a result of the discussion here. You can find it here : http://www.musicbanter.com/announcem...moderated.html

[RoxyRollah]

Thank you.

[The Batlord]

I think the title of the thread is pretty loaded. I'd prefer something more along the lines of "Are You In Favor of the Proposed Rule Changes?".

[Cuthbert]

Na, I'm 100% fine with the rules.

[RoxyRollah]

How about all in favor?


Now that you point it out, kinda sounds like Obama's initial campaign platform. Change. Hope.

[RoxyRollah]

Originally Posted by monkeytennis

Na, I'm 100% fine with the rules.

Use the vote button, doofus. I can't keep talley if you just respond. :P Means I have to count and we all know I can't.

[Guybrush]

Originally Posted by The Batlord

I think the title of the thread is pretty loaded. I'd prefer something more along the lines of "Are You In Favor of the Proposed Rule Changes?".

I think it is pretty accurate.

Equal means that everyone receives punishment for breaking rules. To rid this site of favoritism which might otherwise protect a rule breaking member is one of the most important ideas behind this suggestion.

Consistent means that enforcement follows as a predictable consequence whenever a rule is broken and that enforcement of that rule happens in a predictable way, ex. always with a PM stating the cause and an amount of infractions that you can gauge beforehand.

This is at the heart, soul and goal of the philosophy behind the suggestion.

[Cuthbert]

Originally Posted by RoxyRollah

Use the vote button, doofus. I can't keep talley if you just respond. :P Means I have to count and we all know I can't.

lol I forgot. I do apologise, most sincerely. Will do this now.

I've never had any reason to have a problem with the rules. Not sure I agree with permabans but nothing to do with me.

Voted anyway.

[Guybrush]

Originally Posted by monkeytennis

lol I forgot. I do apologise, most sincerely. Will do this now.

I've never had any reason to have a problem with the rules. Not sure I agree with permabans but nothing to do with me.

Voted anyway.

Some solid, educated reasoning behind that vote, I'm sure.

[RoxyRollah]

Can't just be Martin's preference?