Originally Posted by
Professor-Alex
Firstly, I'd like to thank you Alice for your continued good attitude and approach to problems and solutions, it really makes a nice change :)
I can answer this one purely from a personal perspective because its the way I like to do things and think its most fair. Except in the case of spammers and the obvious rulebreakers, I ALWAYS give some sort of final warning PM before manually banning someone. There will probably be a few members in this forum who've received one from me and can testify to that. They often contain sentences such as "continuing to do xyz will earn you a caution, if not worse punishment." That way, if they choose to ignore it and carry on doing what they were doing, they deserve the ban and knew what they were getting themselves into. Other members of the smod+ team do things slightly different to the way I do, but that's their lookout. It may take about 5 minutes longer of my time but it avoids situations like Neversoft's and Nemo's, presuming they weren't PMd prior to the bans (I know no details of the situation so I'm not really in a position to comment).
But I seem to have digressed. Your idea of rewarding positive contributors was actually suggested to me a while ago by, of all people, Coldplay. He suggested that moderators select someone in their section each month (they're encouraged to post and interact so they get to know people's attitudes fairly well) who contributes positively to the section, be it with well written posts, amusing posts or interesting posts, receive the competition winner's VIP that is currently in use on the Seacat5 account. Obviously the colour and name would have to be changed to suit the situation but it seems like a worthwhile reward. I believe I suggested it to MAD about a month ago but haven't heard much of it since, I'll have to pester him when he (and I!) gets back and point him towards this thread.
Although sods law says nvr has already done something about it and I've wasted the last 10 minutes typing the response :P