The New Moderation Changes.

[Nixt]

All infractions are overlooked so if that happened you wouldnt be banend for long.

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.

[---MAD---]

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.

Off course it requires human input. The infractions are given out by humans. Without the humans to infract there would be no bans .

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.

They've added a system, but it won't work until they've fixed other systems "/

Things like that are accounted for already. What systems need to be fixed?

[DaveTaylor]

Off course it requires human input. The infractions are given out by humans. Without the humans to infract there would be no bans .

Things like that are accounted for already. What systems need to be fixed?

Righto means I am 2 infractions away from 7 day ban w00t!

[Nixt]

Off course it requires human input. The infractions are given out by humans. Without the humans to infract there would be no bans .

Yes. However I also think there should be human input when it comes to the ban itself; a direct input.

[GommeInc]

Things like that are accounted for already. What systems need to be fixed?

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.

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.

[---MAD---]

Righto means I am 2 infractions away from 7 day ban w00t!

No because you don't have any infractions - you have warnings.

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.

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 .

[CALLUMisbanned]

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.

[jesus]

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.

[Meti]

BUT WHAT IF PEOPLE ALREADY HAVE LIKE 15 INFRACTIONS OR SOMETHING? WILL THEY GET BANNED OR WHAT?

[CALLUMisbanned]

BUT WHAT IF PEOPLE ALREADY HAVE LIKE 15 INFRACTIONS OR SOMETHING? WILL THEY GET BANNED OR WHAT?

Stop talking in capitals. If they had 15 active infractions then yes they would. But they should be banned already.