Discuss: New Warning System
- 0May 31, '05 by brian Adminplease use this thread to discuss the following announcement
admin note: please do not discuss your warnings in this thread, if you have a question with a warning or think that there was an error, please respond to the warning with your question. there may be a few bugs of glitches, we will try to work them out. thanks
Quote from brianthis is just a quick announcement to let you all know about a new warning system that we have implemented.
with the extensive and rapid growth of our forums (approx. 3500 new members a month) it is becoming more and more difficult for our staff to keep track of over 75,000 members and issues that arises with violations of our terms of service. so, we have installed a warning system, which will help all of our staff members to handle issues in an efficient manner and keep track of users who do not follow the terms of service.
auto censor feature:
the system will automatically issue warnings for posts which contain censored words (swear words and foul language).
manual staff warnings:
when a staff members reads a post that does not follow the terms of service, they can simply warn users, with one of the warning types (see screen shot image below). the user will get a pm (private message) and/or an email that will give the specifics.
how it works:
essentially, the system is based on a 100 point system. if you reach 100 points, your account will be banned. each warning has a maturity date, for example you get warned for foul language use, that warning is a 10 point warning and for last 30 days. after 30 days, the 10 point warning will drop off. it takes a considerable amount of warnings or very clear violations to get banned.
please note, this is a new system and their may be some bugs, and/or we may change or modify the warnings etc… the goal of implementing this system is to help keep the forums running smoothly and to keep the forums a friendly place and helping the staff members make efficient use of their time.
below is a screen shot of the current warning types, which may be changed and modified as this is a work in progress):
Last edit by brian on Jun 20, '05
- 0Jun 1, '05 by Marie_LPN, RN(being a Negative Nancy again here...)
It seems like a form of public embarrassment to me (i saw a post that had the warning). Everyone sees that this person has been warned, or such, but it could be a deterrent for someone to never post anything again, though. Really NOT trying to blow it out of proportion, but i thought of "The Scarlet Letter" when i saw it. It could almost be seen as a way of branding a troublemaker? (I realize this is not the intent, BUT......)
It's almost like being in a room full of co-workers and your boss yelling at you. Embarrasing, but is it effective, or the most effective way to handle a situation?
I'm all for letting a person know, but for it to be a public display, i don't feel is right. If instead there was some way to click on an icon that pm's the offending person a warning, without the public displays on the thread/post, that would be different to me.
And what if you had a poster who simply didn't like another, and just nitpicked everything posted, to rack up their points?Last edit by Marie_LPN, RN on Jun 1, '05
- 0Jun 1, '05 by fab4fanGood point, Marie. I can see a public reprimand being a potential catalyst for mobbing.
Shouldn't this be handled just as it would in the workplace...in private? I've even thought that the "reason for edit" at the bottom of the post was not necessary. I don't care if the OP wants to explain, but if a mod. deletes something d/t violation of TOS/whatever, I don't think that needs to be public knowledge. "Edited by moderator" would be explanation enough, IMO. Most of the time people have a pretty good idea why a post was edited by a mod., anyway.
- 0Jun 1, '05 by Kelly_the_GreatI'm not real crazy about censorship period.
It makes me feel very self-conscious and guarded. I guess that's fine. I just enjoyed the openess and uninhibited expression of others on this site, free from managers, office politics, etc. It was a place to freely express your feelings (anger, sadness, frustration, happiness, whatever), you know?
I understand, it's got to be awfully hard to monitor all the members. However, I always thought of the moderators as being active participants, guides and resources to the members. I never thought of them as "monitors."
I didn't think we needed monitoring. We're all adults, right?
Oh well, that's my