Link: http://www.habboxforum.com/showthrea...55#post4585755
Personally its loads better i think :]
Not sure on the no pm for warnings but then again shouldnt break the rules.
Printable View
Link: http://www.habboxforum.com/showthrea...55#post4585755
Personally its loads better i think :]
Not sure on the no pm for warnings but then again shouldnt break the rules.
Automatic bans = big thumbs down from me. I don't like them simply because I think there needs to be an intelligent and human input when it comes to banning members which you do not get from automatic bans. As I've said before, changing a system that is fine already can often cause problems. Why try and fix something that isn't broken?!
But getting infractions is alot harder now and less chance of getting them.
Yes, but that is hardly a remedy for my qualms ;).Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollywood
you should still get a pm for warnings but it seems better :)
oo I will still have active warnings. Can't you bump it back like... a month?
There still is the "appeal agaisnt" issue. ;) And all infractions are overlooked anyhow.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garion
Yes I am aware of this, I used to do it myself. Tended to be the least favourite job of all Super Moderators :-P. Nevertheless, I simply feel that an action such as banning a member should have a human input. Simple as that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollywood
Automatic banning will probably, on the whole, work out fine but that's not going to change my opinion toward the lack of intelligent decision behind automatic bans.
I also think removing PMs for warnings is silly, where is the justification for this? They are supposed to remind users of the rules... if they don't get a PM and it takes them a while to notice a new warning in their User CP they are not receiving this reminder. It seems like a totally pointless change just for the damn sake of it.
Im unsure on why warnings are set to no pms now. Though auto banning will save time for super moderators and give them chance to do other job roles though.
:] Lets agree to disagree on the auto banning.
it's okay i guess. i've never really had over 4 active infractions/warnings at one point i don't think so i'm not bothered.
I agree that you should still get a pm for a warning
autoban works well in some situations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garion
Eg on fp you get instabanned for saying the N word but most of the banning is done by only a few moderators. Less than here really, with about 100,000 members.
I think you should still receive a PM fo warnings less robotic that way =]
This is a sign that you all should be less naughty now.
I'm not saying it won't work, it will be madeto work. I personally just don't like it because it is far too robotic. In my opinion banning should have human input, as they can make an informed decision in regard to a ban. An instant ban for having a certain amount of infractions does do this and for that reason I don't like the idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamesy
yes I agree garion. what I was saing was autoban works some places. Here I don't think it will, we have a smaller community and a human input feels better than an automated message.
What if the 10th Infraction was obviously a wrong decision and should be reversed...
You can't reverse it because you're banned?
All infractions are overlooked so if that happened you wouldnt be banend for long.
I still like the idea, but I still think you should get a PM when you receive a warning. Otherwise you may not realise you've done something wrong, and then you'll keep doing it until you get banned :(
Yes master :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by jesus
Exactly what I am thinking. I also don't like the idea that people get infractions for petty trivial things that are about as serious as the parliament members watching a cat dance around a mexican hat. 5 infractions for contstantly swearing to purposely annoy members = infraction. Swearing but the filter doesn't pick it up = deserves an infraction, but isn't worth a ban if done 5 times. Same goes for people talking in another language 5 times, tis very petty and not worth a ban.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garion
They've added a system, but it won't work until they've fixed other systems "/
It's still an inconvenience though. I'd find it very annoying to be banned for even a couple of hours to find myself unbanned because the Infraction was wrongly issued. If bans were left to Super Moderators, this problem would not arise as the SMod should be individually checking each Infraction and justifying the ban.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollywood
Off course it requires human input. The infractions are given out by humans. Without the humans to infract there would be no bans ;).Quote:
Originally Posted by Garion
Things like that are accounted for already. What systems need to be fixed?Quote:
Originally Posted by GommeInc
Righto means I am 2 infractions away from 7 day ban w00t!Quote:
Originally Posted by ---MAD---
Yes. However I also think there should be human input when it comes to the ban itself; a direct input.Quote:
Originally Posted by ---MAD---
The moderation system, the rules... Anything linked to the Infraction System. Members can get infracted through moderator misjudgement AND are not aware of which rules are more serious than the others. This system may work, but it won't make a whole lot of sense, because at the moment any broken rule, whether it is serious or not, will earn an infraction. There's a few ways to go about it. Change the rules so it has sections; serious rules and whatever you'll call less-serious rules. Change the Moderation system to somehow solve moderators issuing warnings/infractions which are not rightly deserved, and half the time they know it once it's brought into attention. Change the infraction system so it knows what rules aren't serious, but this will still confuse members because they will not know what rules are serious etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by ---MAD---
Then comes the robotic bit which is going in the wrong directions from what people want. They don't want robots moderating us, they want to communicate with something fleshy sitting behind a computer.
No because you don't have any infractions - you have warnings.Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveTaylor
Moderation is mostly all about judgement theres no way we can explain each possible outcome for each rule. Thats why the infractions/warnings given out are checked by smods/admins and why we allow members to report any unfair ones so they can tell us their side in case of mis-judgement or confusion. You have to remember, the people moderating are mostly teenagers not trained professionals ;).Quote:
Originally Posted by GommeInc
You're always first to make a thread about every announcement, and you always agree?
And this is alright I guess, but perm bans from auto is crap, should be from smods.
I'm in full support of this new system. If you are complaining that you don't get a PM with a warning when you do something wrong, my suggestion is that you take a look through the forum rules to make sure you don't get one in the first place. :)
BUT WHAT IF PEOPLE ALREADY HAVE LIKE 15 INFRACTIONS OR SOMETHING? WILL THEY GET BANNED OR WHAT?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMuscle
Stop talking in capitals. If they had 15 active infractions then yes they would. But they should be banned already.
Then why, oh why, are you introducing the use of automatic bans?!Quote:
Originally Posted by ---MAD---
Why do you hold that opinion? Why do you think that individuals should not receive a PM? Please explain your way of thinking.Quote:
Originally Posted by jesus
It seems so stupid that people don't get a PM after receiving a warning and I just really cannot see why you would remove it? If someone can justify the reason I will sit back and say okay, great, good idea. I was wrong, you are right - but as of yet I do not see any justification for it.
Looks I need to calm down a bit then. I think I had 8 infractions and 6 warnings... I might just ask Alex to post my information like he did last time which he shouldn't have done. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by le harry
Rich coming from you?Quote:
Originally Posted by jesus
They'd be banned already.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMuscle
Rich coming from you.Quote:
Originally Posted by jesus
If you wern't a moderator you would 100% against this as your the forum
'spammer' and wont want to be prevented to gaining your 1000 posts day achievment.
I'm against this. What was wrong with the old moderation system?
i think it's great ;D
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMuscle
No they wouldn't. The auto-bans start in 3 weeks so that gives time for existing infractions or warnings to expire.Quote:
Originally Posted by CALLUMisbanned
I was agreeing with the auto-ban ideology. :O I just made a suggestion for those complaining about not receiving PMs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garion
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRBlueMoon
The highest amount of infractions I've had at one time is 2 with 4 warnings. :SQuote:
Originally Posted by @xP
Good. Everyone else seems to be against everything that the forum ever does... until it's them who are being bullied or whatever. :eusa_boohQuote:
Originally Posted by Minty
They will never be happy - whatever management do. You know what I mean... :$Quote:
Originally Posted by jesus
So do you agree with the lack of warning PMs, or not? Why do you think automatic bans are a good idea? I dislike posts where people do not back up their statements, it makes them seem like they are following others blindly.Quote:
Originally Posted by jesus
I am disagreeing because my opinion happens to go against the implementation of new systems. Not because I have anything against management. In a recent conversation with MAD I told him I thought, on the whole, Habbox were doing fine but occasionally decisions were made that, to me, seem stupid. This decision happens to be one of them.
We didn't talk about infractions.Quote:
Originally Posted by jesus
I'm talking about your constant rule breaking.
The spam etc.
But i guess your dong your job now telling people to read the forum rules.
All im trying to say is you spam all over the forum.
And there still no specific reason to why the old system went and the new system is coming in. :rolleyes:
Sorry Corey but he doesn't spam. There is no rule against making lots of posts in one day. All of Jamie's posts contribute to the topic at hand so all his posts are justified. Spam is if someone went around posting, "LOL" - "YEH" etc. Jamies posts are lengthy and as I said, he's always contributing.Quote:
Originally Posted by @xP
I totally agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garion
Also, what if you get a handful of unfair warnings/infractions and get banned/cautioned? You'll have to go through a ton of trouble to get unbanned/uncautioned when it won't be your fault in the first place. It takes atleast 5 days for them to unban you these days... Thats very unfair and I can see it happening a lot.
I think 5 warnings for a caution is too less... You could get like 4 warnings all on the same day and then not get any until 2 months later, but get cautioned for it. It was a lot better before where how often you broke the rules determined whether you got cautioned/banned or not. As Garion said already, you need human input, not some computer.