The New Moderation Changes.

[Plank]

I agree that you should still get a pm for a warning

[Jamesy]

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.
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.

autoban works well in some situations.

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.

[Dan2nd]

I think you should still receive a PM fo warnings less robotic that way =]

[jesus]

This is a sign that you all should be less naughty now.

[Nixt]

autoban works well in some situations.

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'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.

[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.

[Kardan]

What if the 10th Infraction was obviously a wrong decision and should be reversed...

You can't reverse it because you're banned?

[today]

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

[Test:Tube:Baby]

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

This is a sign that you all should be less naughty now.

Yes master :rolleyes:

[GommeInc]

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?!

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 "/