(New) Infraction System (re)explained

• Ashikoki wrote on 2013-05-10 21:22

  Quote from Lyrveil;1085764:

  Shouldn't ban dodging give 28 points then? (it shows 26 in the chart).

  
  
  I'm sure glad I never closed out of photoshop last night. I almost never save in .psd files, and I forgot what font I used, so fixing this would've been a huge pain.
  
  Its been fixed now.
  
  Edit:
  
  @Episkey
  
  Its come to my attention thanks to our great moderator friend Bakuryu, that infraction expiration dates are actually automatically added to the ban period, so that its true expiration timer only begins when you are unbanned. That really cuts a lot of work for everyone, how convenient.
• Episkey wrote on 2013-05-10 21:30

  Quote from Ashikoki;1086029:

  
  @Episkey
  
  Its come to my attention thanks to our great moderator friend Bakuryu, that infraction expiration dates are actually automatically added to the ban period, so that its true expiration timer only begins when you are unbanned. That really cuts a lot of work for everyone, how convenient.

  
  
  Yes ... I now recall that was how the system worked previously.
  
  While that does address part of my concern, the fact that major infractions can completely expire still makes up most of my concern.
  If the Staff refuses to revert it back to how it normally was, couldn't the system be adjusted so that only half of the points expire - yet the other half remains permanent?
  
  I mean, that should alleviate the fear of getting a lengthy ban sentence from those users who have amended their ways.
• Ashikoki wrote on 2013-05-10 21:51
  I don't wanna~
  
  Seriously though, we're doing a lot of what-if's and theorycrafting, but I really doubt that it will become much of a relevant issue. Half a year is such a long time too. I don't see why you can't just be warned again. It really helps people who are otherwise fine catch a break every once in a while, when they're PMSing after a stressful day and the rays of the full bloodmoon shines down their windows on to their skins, and someone say something to tick them off but they're just a tad tipsy from the dessert wine so they just can't hold themselves back. /moretheorycrafting
• Episkey wrote on 2013-05-10 22:19

  Quote from Ashikoki;1086049:

  
  Seriously though, we're doing a lot of what-if's and theorycrafting, but I really doubt that it will become much of a relevant issue. Half a year is such a long time too. I don't see why you can't just be warned again.

  
  
  But it is a very relevant -
  
  ...
  
  Hnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn ....
  
  The infraction system that was in place beforehand had it so that major (severe) infractions never expired. There were no public complaints or objections to this system and it worked perfectly.
  
  But now, after some private discussion between the Moderation Staff, this major concept has now been changed. Considering every other change in the rules has had some public discussion, I find it alarming that something as important as this was just decided behind closed doors.
  
  With an official announcement now made, my position (which was how everything was originally) is now looked upon as ... what-if's/theory-crafting?
  
  No. No. No. This is some pseudo-shifting of burden of proof.
  
  If anything, this new change to the rules should be questioned, analyzed, and supported! But, now due to how convenient this seems for everyone - now I have to defend a position that should have never been changed to begin with.
  
  And now there is a superficial support for this new change, only due to the "positive" benefits given to those who have had severe infractions in the past.
  
  No one has been able to supply proper points - only selfish statements and what-if's.
  I may not be able to tell the future, but I sure as heck know that letting severe infractions not expire worked perfectly fine.
  
  And it did it's job, it's purpose as a severe infraction was fulfilled.
  
  
  

  Quote from Ashikoki;1086049:

  It really helps people who are otherwise fine catch a break every once in a while, when they're PMSing after a stressful day and the rays of the full bloodmoon shines down their windows on to their skins, and someone say something to tick them off but they're just a tad tipsy from the dessert wine so they just can't hold themselves back. /moretheorycrafting

  
  
  Even if you are joking, that isn't a serious excuse for severely breaking the rules.
  
  That line of thinking doesn't work in real daily life, do you give murderers and thieves "breaks"?
  
  
  Why does everyone suddenly view this differently? Because the medium is just a forum?
  These are still human interactions that have consequences associated with them.
• Space Pirate Nithiel wrote on 2013-05-10 22:36
  I don't see any infraction tab. Whur es eet?
• Kingofrunes wrote on 2013-05-10 22:39

  Quote from Space Pirate Nithiel;1086090:

  I don't see any infraction tab. Whur es eet?

  
  
  I think that means we don't have any infractions dear.
• Space Pirate Nithiel wrote on 2013-05-10 22:41

  Quote from Kingofrunes;1086092:

  I think that means we don't have any infractions dear.

  
  
  Oh. Das gewd. <3
• Bakuryu wrote on 2013-05-10 22:59

  Quote from Kingofrunes;1086092:

  I think that means we don't have any infractions dear.

  
  
  Correct.
• Kenero wrote on 2013-05-10 23:16
  The whole heart that many people worry about never expiring infractions is that there's no way to enforce policies to a misbehaving member who knows "loopholes" in the system to bypass it.
  
  Personally, that only happens if you only think the system is run purely by mechanics.
  
  Community wise, we rarely have those "really" misbehaving members, but if we do, our moderators are not robots or mechanical means. They can specifically ban a person with enough reason and altogether bypass the whole infraction system if a misbehaving chaotic member deserves this.
  
  While some may see this as an abuse of power, it's really to our benefit. The only thing is that we have to trust our moderators and administrators to enforce said policies effectively.
  
  I am sure if a misbehaving member comes along and tries to turn the forums upside down, their banishment from the forum will be met with little surprise.
• Ashikoki wrote on 2013-05-11 00:00

  Quote from Episkey;1086079:

  There were no public complaints or objections to this system and it worked perfectly.

  
  
  No public complaints, but some private ones. Most appeals are done privately. We almost always grant them too, unless they're consistently on bad behavior. Also, the system actually failed really hard in my point of view, as a lot of members just jumped their perma-infracted accounts for fresh starts. This really isn't ban dodging, and we don't really care when people make alt accounts, so its hard to tell if you're just infraction dodging. It also makes a lot of extra work for us mods too, since sometimes we're completely unaware.
  
  I'm hoping this gives a little more incentives for members to stick to their main accounts.
  
  

  But now, after some private discussion between the Moderation Staff, this major concept has now been changed. Considering every other change in the rules has had some public discussion, I find it alarming that something as important as this was just decided behind closed doors.

  
  
  I guess so, but I didn't feel such a change needed community discussion. These changes aren't really anything the users themselves have to worry about, as it doesn't mean they have to behave any differently. It was mostly a more organized guide for how moderators should deal with infractions. The information is shown publicly like this since you all have the right to know.
  
  Things like word-filters, rules, spam policies, they're something that impacts how members are supposed to act, so we discussed it in public.
  
  

  And now there is a superficial support for this new change, only due to the "positive" benefits given to those who have had severe infractions in the past.

  
  
  Its what-ifs and theorycrafting simply because it hasn't happened yet. Never in the history of nation have we had someone even given 2+ month bans (well, there have been, but they got permabanned afterwards).
  
  

  Even if you are joking, that isn't a serious excuse for severely breaking the rules.
  
  That line of thinking doesn't work in real daily life, do you give murderers and thieves "breaks"?
  
  Why does everyone suddenly view this differently? Because the medium is just a forum?
  These are still human interactions that have consequences associated with them.

  
  
  I would say the short answer is "yes". Being rude on a forum is not the same as murdering or thieving. I know that there is the matter of "severely breaking the rules", but just because it is the worst thing you could do in a smaller system doesn't mean it should be comparable to the worst thing you could do in a much larger system.
  
  If I say hurtful things to a friend, and we get in to a really heated fight, it is kinda like a temporary ban when they dont want to see or talk to me for a while. Afterwards, if we get along for a long while again, and then we have a bad day and get back into a new fight, I believe the previous fight won't have an impact on it. Maybe its a poor analogy?
  
  Dota 2 uses a very similar "warning" system. If someone is toxic, and they are reported, they are given a warning before they are punished. If they repeat the behavior, the system bans them. If they stay clean for a while, then even if they are really rude again some day, they'll be given a reminder warning. I really like this system.
  
  I wish we could all be mature and everyone is nice to each other all the time, but some people have difficulty with anger. Its no excuse I know, but it really does happen to the best of us. Am I being too nice? If someone is going to be a problem, they probably will repeatedly act out, and get themselves banned anyways.
• Episkey wrote on 2013-05-11 00:30

  Quote from Kenero;1086109:

  The only thing is that we have to trust our moderators and administrators to enforce said policies effectively.

  
  
  As much as I appreciate and trust some of the members of the Moderation team, I'd much rather not let the staff deal with misbehaving members on a case-by-case basis.
  
  Because then people get past the system.
  
  

  Quote from Ashikoki;1086135:

  No public complaints, but some private ones. Most appeals are done privately. We almost always grant them too, unless they're consistently on bad behavior. Also, the system actually failed really hard in my point of view, as a lot of members just jumped their perma-infracted accounts for fresh starts. This really isn't ban dodging, and we don't really care when people make alt accounts, so its hard to tell if you're just infraction dodging. It also makes a lot of extra work for us mods too, since sometimes we're completely unaware.

  
  
  If someone is plainly making new accounts for those reasons - then yes ... that's ban dodging.
  I know it's extra work, but it's to be expected whenever you have punishments. People will always try to circumvent them.
  
  ...
  
  

  Quote from Ashikoki;1086135:

  I guess so, but I didn't feel such a change needed community discussion. These changes aren't really anything the users themselves have to worry about, as it doesn't mean they have to behave any differently. It was mostly a more organized guide for how moderators should deal with infractions. The information is shown publicly like this since you all have the right to know.

  
  
  I vehemently and utterly disagree.
  
  "These changes aren't really anything the users themselves have to worry about, as it doesn't mean they have to behave any differently."
  
  The concept that severe infractions having an expiration date, does not cause worry for users nor will it change their behavior? Um.
  
  1-) Oh that's nice, people who have had past major infractions will now have those points removed if it's been over 180 days.
  2-) Now that all infractions have an expiration date, I do not have to worry about slipping up on my behavior. I'll just get warned or the worst case a temporary (albeit lengthy) infraction.
  
  That's two of my less personal concerns right there.
  
  
  

  Quote from Ashikoki;1086135:

  I would say the short answer is "yes". Being rude on a forum is not the same as murdering or thieving. I know that there is the matter of "severely breaking the rules", but just because it is the worst thing you could do in a smaller system doesn't mean it should be comparable to the worst thing you could do in a much larger system.

  
  
  Hating someone in your heart is the same as murder.
  
  That concept aside, trolling and flaming someone can be quite hurtful. I could delve into the concept of cyber-bullying, but of course - our precious Mabination members have never engaged in such heinous behavior.
  
  You are focusing on the person who is receiving the infraction, I'm focusing on the person who has to deal with whatever that person has done.
  
  
  

  Quote from Ashikoki;1086135:

  If I say hurtful things to a friend, and we get in to a really heated fight, it is kinda like a temporary ban when they dont want to see or talk to me for a while. Afterwards, if we get along for a long while again, and then we have a bad day and get back into a new fight, I believe the previous fight won't have an impact on it. Maybe its a poor analogy?
  
  Dota 2 uses a very similar "warning" system. If someone is toxic, and they are reported, they are given a warning before they are punished. If they repeat the behavior, the system bans them. If they stay clean for a while, then even if they are really rude again some day, they'll be given a reminder warning. I really like this system.
  
  I wish we could all be mature and everyone is nice to each other all the time, but some people have difficulty with anger. Its no excuse I know, but it really does happen to the best of us. Am I being too nice? If someone is going to be a problem, they probably will repeatedly act out, and get themselves banned anyways.

  
  
  However, if this is your mentality - that's fine ... I'll respect that.
  
  But, I still do not approve of expiring severe infractions - since people can wreck quite a bit of havoc before even getting banned via this system.
• Ashikoki wrote on 2013-05-11 00:41

  Quote from Episkey;1086144:

  I know it's extra work, but it's to be expected whenever you have punishments. People will always try to circumvent them.

  
  
  Its not "extra work" thats the issue. Its that we have no way of knowing unless we actually directly look into each individual accounts. Ban/infraction dodging is so difficult for us to deal with because we don't actually know about it initially, I want to minimize the possibility of it as much as possible.
  
  And when you have a 10 point infraction that never goes away, it is very tempting to just start a new account, as opposed to being promised that a lengthy period of good behavior will forgive it.
  
  

  A lot of other stuff

  
  
  I hear you, and I can see your points. I don't really know what to do though, because I'm still feeling that expiring infractions are fine. We could settle for something in between. Like if you got a severe (or major in the new terms) infraction, the points are not permanent, but the history is. So future violations skip the warning phase. At the least, I need the points to go away. It is a huge issue for members to receive bans from a minor 2 point infraction (spam, for example) for something they did a year ago that isn't even relevant to their current violation. They've proven themselves fine in the original category of infration at that point.
  
  So yeah. Major infractions. If you have one in your infraction history, you no longer receive warnings in that category even if the points have expired. Does that seem fair?
• Episkey wrote on 2013-05-11 00:51

  Quote from Ashikoki;1086156:

  Like if you got a severe (or major in the new terms) infraction, the points are not permanent, but the history is. So future violations skip the warning phase. At the least, I need the points to go away. It is a huge issue for members to receive bans from a minor 2 point infraction (spam, for example) for something they did a year ago that isn't even relevant to their current violation. They've proven themselves fine in the original category of infration at that point.

  
  
  Hmmmm. :llama_blink:
  
  I didn't think about new accounts - or rather, I can't believe people would do such a thing.
  
  
  

  Quote from Ashikoki;1086156:

  So yeah. Major infractions. If you have one in your infraction history, you no longer receive warnings in that category even if the points have expired. Does that seem fair?

  
  
  In any case, I feel that what you proposed is fair enough. At least people will get their points going away.
  
  Oh well. I'll accept it, hopefully this will prevent any future episodes from occurring.
• Ashikoki wrote on 2013-05-11 02:10

  Quote from Episkey;1086162:

  Hmmmm. :llama_blink:
  
  I didn't think about new accounts - or rather, I can't believe people would do such a thing.

  
  
  Its been one of the biggest problems regarding this.
• Ithiliel wrote on 2013-05-11 02:32
  Epi, darling, always so caring about Nation <3 We appreciate all your feedback and concern~
  
  THAT BEING SAID MOTORMOUTH (I love you) YA GOTTA HAVE SOME FAITH IN US AND THE SYSTEM. We'll work out anything that pops up, or I know you will gladly help point things out =)