Forum Rule Changes including Introduction of Infraction System

[Smudge]

I'm probably breaking one of the new rules by saying this, but that's ridiculous. There have been some truly awful posters on this forum (some might include me in that) but there are several deliberate ****stirrers that spring to mind (Camel56, ReallyCrazy) who were given several chances, but simply failed or chose not to comply to the rules time and time again. Why create even more work for moderators who volunteer their time to make this forum a better place when - after these posters have demonstrated they are unwilling to fit in and follow the rules - there is a simple solution to the problem?

If the moderators were paid, it could well be a different story, but they're not (and neither I nor presumably the moderators themselves would ever expect to be paid).

 

[Jarquis]

On the subject of stuff one doesn't care about - maths equations on the forums should be considered a violation of the EPO rule.

Universal language etc etc..

 

[Uppercut]

Looks like a pretty good idea to me. Might also help stop that thing where people get a warning they disagree with and the thread turns into a crappy discussion on whether they committed a warnable offence.

 

[Furball]

Bit surprised we need this new system, I think the forum in fine shape and still the best on the net. Still if the Mods think it best, I would like to take a wait and see position

Anyway still don't think there should be a permanent ban for anyone, surely a year is long enough

It shouldn't really impact on anyone's experience when browsing - it's really a tool which should make housekeeping for the mods a hell of a lot easier without really changing anything for us plebs.

 

[duffer]

If we have a forum filter then why the need for the inappropriate language infraction? Intentionally avoiding the filter, then fair ****s to the you for warning someone. Also, do you just hand out the infraction on the spot as soon as you see a filter avoidance or do you allow for the possibility of a typo?

 

[silentstriker]

Easy way not to make a typo is not to type the word. If I see it, it'd be a warning/infraction for avoiding the filter.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Universal language etc etc..

-1 Maths.

 

[Jarquis]

-1 Maths.

I clicked 'View Post' for that. gagf

 

[G.I.Joe]

I'm disappointed you didn't comment on the irony of that post

 

[Blaze 18]

The benchmark00-Jono and Burgey-GIMH exchanges are quite funny and make for a most enjoyable read for mine (same goes for G.I.Joe's posts). In my opinion, there is nothing wrong whatsoever with what they post. Overtly strict moderation is not really desirable (again, it is just my opinion). The moderators are doing a great job currently, don't see the point in fixing something that isn't broke.

 

[Furball]

Should just re-appoint me, there's been a distinct lack of complaints about the moderating recently.

 

[GIMH]

Quiet you sack of rubbish

 

[Athlai]

Should just re-appoint me, there's been a distinct lack of complaints about the moderating recently.

 

[Sanz]

So how does one get those points ? It is not automatic, is it, A moderator still has to use his judgment and decide what offense is worth how many points ? If so then I don't get the point of it, it just seems to me that the new rules are going to target new or certain members.

And to me that is the bigger issue and therefore IMO the new rules isn't going to bring any consistency. Those who provoke, call names, continue to mock others, continue to make fun of others,make condescending posts will continue to do so and will continue to get away with it.

I am totally against these new rules, it is certainly going to harm the forum environment and I fear that it will be used harshly against new members. That was my 2 cents. Either ways, it does not matter to me much anyway because I barely post now a days.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Infraction system. Absolute rubbish. All the worst forums have this. Some of the more recent moderators are very poor and this will make them worse and even more haughty. Such a complex system is unnecessary and way too complicated for some of those entrusted with enforcing it.

 

[archie mac]

I'm probably breaking one of the new rules by saying this, but that's ridiculous. There have been some truly awful posters on this forum (some might include me in that) but there are several deliberate ****stirrers that spring to mind (Camel56, ReallyCrazy) who were given several chances, but simply failed or chose not to comply to the rules time and time again. Why create even more work for moderators who volunteer their time to make this forum a better place when - after these posters have demonstrated they are unwilling to fit in and follow the rules - there is a simple solution to the problem?

If the moderators were paid, it could well be a different story, but they're not (and neither I nor presumably the moderators themselves would ever expect to be paid).

Don't be so subtle mate

They come back once a year not every 24 hours, surely they can police that.

Remind them of the rules before they are allowed back and if they do not follow them, ban them again.

All I am saying is people can change and 12 months may give them a chance to change

 

[Turbinator]

Infraction system. Absolute rubbish. All the worst forums have this. Some of the more recent moderators are very poor and this will make them worse and even more haughty. Such a complex system is unnecessary and way too complicated for some of those entrusted with enforcing it.

Such as?

 

[Fusion]

So how does one get those points ? It is not automatic, is it, A moderator still has to use his judgment and decide what offense is worth how many points ?

The infraction points are set and not aribitary (refer to James' orginal post for a list of infractions and their corresponding points).

And to me that is the bigger issue and therefore IMO the new rules isn't going to bring any consistency. Those who provoke, call names, continue to mock others, continue to make fun of others,make condescending posts will continue to do so and will continue to get away with it.

I am totally against these new rules, it is certainly going to harm the forum environment and I fear that it will be used harshly against new members. That was my 2 cents. Either ways, it does not matter to me much anyway because I barely post now a days.

The whole point of implementing this new system to clearly define what the rules are for everyone, and for the mods to have a more consistent approach to enforcing them. As such, I think your fear that the rules will somehow target the newer members are unfounded. If anything, they should benefit from the new system the most as they will be treated exactly the same as long-established members (as it should be IMO).

I don't think we've let people consistently get away with any of the list of things you mentioned in your post. The mods are fairly active on the forum and take immediate action when they see something abusive. If we miss something, then there is always the "report post" function. Report it and I guarantee you it will be looked at by the mods. That aspect of moderation will not change with or without the new system.

 

[Craig]

Don't be so subtle mate

They come back once a year not every 24 hours, surely they can police that.

Remind them of the rules before they are allowed back and if they do not follow them, ban them again.

All I am saying is people can change and 12 months may give them a chance to change

Absolutely no way. I would be certainly outraged and extremely angry if Rodgie ever came back. He was banned once, came back and acted like a douche bag, and was banned for good after that, and judging by the MSN conversations I had with James, Rodgie had burnt his bridges in ever coming back.

Infraction system. Absolute rubbish. All the worst forums have this. Some of the more recent moderators are very poor and this will make them worse and even more haughty. Such a complex system is unnecessary and way too complicated for some of those entrusted with enforcing it.

With all due respect, why do you bother posting on here?

 

[fredfertang]

Don't be so subtle mate

They come back once a year not every 24 hours, surely they can police that.

Remind them of the rules before they are allowed back and if they do not follow them, ban them again.

All I am saying is people can change and 12 months may give them a chance to change

Spot on Archie - anyone who comes here and bothers to post must have an interest in cricket and plenty of them are young and, by definition therefore, immature. If they keep coming back it must be because they want to and they'll learn eventually - for the odd ones that are 24 carat trolls is it really that tough to let them put up a few posts every 12 months or so?