Regarding bans

[Fiel]

In the past few months, there have been a few bannings which have caused a bit of a ruckus on the boards. What constitutes a permanent ban? What constitutes a temporary ban? What is an "Autoban"? When is ban evasion truly occuring, and when is a member just trying to contact an admin?

I will clear a lot of things up and make the process simpler and easier for moderators and users alike. There will be new rules here and a lot of restatement for old rules:

First of all, there are four types of banning used at Southperry:

1. Temporary Ban - This is a ban that occurs when you reach 7 points for the first time. After being put on temporary ban, all of your previous infractions will be overturned and you are given a clean slate to try this whole forum thing again. If you receive another 7 points on an account that has already been temporary banned, you will receive a permanent ban. Note that if you have never reached 7 points before and you cause a string of violations that total up to 14 points, you will jump straight to a permenent ban and not go through the temporary ban process.

The purpose of a temporary ban is that you lose access to the account, not access to the forums. If you would like to create another account for the sole purpose of posting without causing any problems, I see no issue with it. Please contact a staff member regarding your creation of another account so we can be mindful of your current posts. A moderator will create a post in the moderator forum regarding your new account. Any infractions you receive on your new account will be applied to your old account. If a moderator finds that you have not notified us about you creating a new account, points are doubled for all infractions.

2. Permanent Ban - To reiterate, a permanent ban is placed on an account, not on a person. If an account is permanently banned, you can still create another account and I see no issue with it. The punishment in this case is losing the account permanently with no hopes of regaining it.

3. Ban on Sight - This type of ban is one in which moderators are encouraged to ban anyone associated with a previous account. A "Ban on Sight" affects the person and not the account. Any account that we find associated with the person is permanently banned with no hopes of reobtaining the account. A Ban on Sight is only for serious offenses to the site, such as blatant disregard for the rules or becoming a constant nuisance. There have been users of this forum which used to be a Ban on Sight but have since returned to normal posting. The user in this case must contact an administrator or moderator and state that he or she is a sufficiently changed person and would like to post again. It is strongly recommended that you don't betray this trust.

4. IP Ban - An IP ban means that your IP will never be able to connect to the website because it's blocked from the server's firewall. Usually an IP Ban and Ban on Sight go together hand in hand.

Type of Ban|What does it ban?
Temporary Ban|Account
Permanent Ban|Account
Ban on Sight|Person
IP Ban|Person

The purpose of using this light moderation system is to give the user every chance possible to do well as a poster on Southperry. This also gives the administration as many opportunities as possible to state what we believe to be generally poor forum behavior and for users to recognize what it means to be a good poster.

------

When is ban evasion truly occuring, and when is a member just trying to contact an admin?

There are no rules for ban evasion for a reason. It is very difficult to evade a ban given that bans are applied to accounts, not people. A ban evasion can only be the result of evading the Ban on Sight and IP Ban above, and this ban evasion results in a permanent ban for past transgressions.

Since many banned users want to contact adminstrators and moderators to get more information about their ban, I have enabled private messaging for banned users so they can do this. This is more fair for the banned user so that he or she knows what he did was wrong, or for a user to fight a ban and it be considered an unjust ban. This also means that banned users do not have to create a mult just to talk to administration.

------

What is an "Autoban"?

An autoban is generally considered to be 7 points which triggers a temporary ban. The rules and regulations will be updated to show points instead of showing "Autoban" so that this is more clear.

------

Bans and IRC

The IRC channel is considered separate from the forum. If you are banned on the forum, you are not also banned from the IRC channel. Considering the recent changes to the forum moderation policy on bans, the IRC channel is not the place for forum disputes. Leave IRC disputes on IRC, and leave forum disputes on the forum.

[Eos]

Since I know this is going to be asked by someone who only skimmed this I may as well get it out now -

Since bans are primarily account specific, not person specific, what value do they have as a deterrent to abusive users?

IE: if all I have to deal with is the inconvenience of a new account every 14 points, why do I care about the points I'm wracking up?

[Turtally]

Since I know this is going to be asked by someone who only skimmed this I may as well get it out now -

Since bans are primarily account specific, not person specific, what value do they have as a deterrent to abusive users?

IE: if all I have to deal with is the inconvenience of a new account every 14 points, why do I care about the points I'm wracking up?


A Ban on Sight is only for serious offenses to the site, such as blatant disregard for the rules or becoming a constant nuisance.

They get a Ban on Sight.

[Eos]

They get a Ban on Sight.

And you'll note that itty bitty tiny important bit was buried in 13 paragraphs of "there are no consequences". Hence my comment on skimming.

[Grag]

I was discussing with BD on IRC last night. He also agreed with me that posting pornography (by your standards of the word 'porn') shouldn't result in a permanent ban. Is this still in effect? Also, am I able to post in the forums without getting banned left and right? Because I honestly can't tell if I am being banned-on-sight or perma-banned, because a certain admin has been banning me when I try to post (even when I try to not cause a ruckus . . .) Because I believe my 2nd alt, Kawasari Mimoto was banned unfairly, as I was doing nothing wrong in accordance with the regulations of the message board.

[Dual]

Just fyi, Katie was drunk when she was banned. I told her to send you a PM to discuss it, since I personally feel she shouldn't get perma'd for being drunk on New Years. A temp ban definitely would be needed though.

[Grag]

Just fyi, Katie was drunk when she was banned. I told her to send you a PM to discuss it, since I personally feel she shouldn't get perma'd for being drunk on New Years. A temp ban definitely would be needed though.

What she did was no different than me, which is why I think it shouldn't be a perma at all, regardless of whether she was drunk or not. Reasoning behind that is porn isn't technically harmful to the site owners, or the site, as much as the viewing users (which may be minors). A forum is too strict if users can get perma banned by posting a couple nipple-slips (whether it's drunken or purposely).

[Eos]

A forum is too strict if users can get perma banned by posting a couple nipple-slips (whether it's drunken or purposely).

Don't try and make it sound like either of you were punished for mere nipple slips when you both posted approximations of full penetration.

Fiel already stated the items identified as "autoban" should be re-read as "7 point infraction".

If Porn isn't wanted here, that's the administrations right to say it won't be tolerated. It's quite harmful to the site if it becomes so prevalent that SP begins filtered or people stop coming because they can't feel safe they're not going to hit a wall of porn that may get they in trouble. This is a maplestory extract site after all, you shouldn't have to worry about avoiding potential porn here.

[Grag]

Don't try and make it sound like either of you were punished for mere nipple slips when you both posted approximations of full penetration.

Fiel already stated the items identified as "autoban" should be re-read as "7 point infraction".

If Porn isn't wanted here, that's the administrations right to say it won't be tolerated. It's quite harmful to the site if it becomes so prevalent that SP begins filtered or people stop coming because they can't feel safe they're not going to hit a wall of porn that may get they in trouble. This is a maplestory extract site after all, you shouldn't have to worry about avoiding potential porn here.

You're right. But I never said they shouldn't get banned for it. I just stated my opinion that it shouldn't be a permanent one. Because a person can learn from their mistake(s). Regardless, nipple-slips or full-penetration, they're both considered as porn. So why do you care? We both still got banned for it, so it's technically the same. -shrug-

[Eos]

Also, am I able to post in the forums without getting banned left and right?

Your bans have already been adjusted per the newly posted rules.

[Katie ♥]

I agree what I did was wrong and shouldn't of been posted. I have no excuses for what I did and I apologize for that. I don't think at the time I thought that picture would get me a perma ban because I didn't think it was a horrible and graphic picture. It wasn't penetration to another human being. At first I got a temp ban for 10 days then it was changed to perma... either way I deserved a ban of some sorts.

[Eos]

\At first I got a temp ban for 10 days then it was changed to perma...

Yours was put back to 10 when Khoi's was.

[Katie ♥]

Yours was put back to 10 when Khoi's was.

Thank you. And I apologize again for posting that picture.

[Grag]

Yours was put back to 10 when Khoi's was.

Thank you very much, I realized what was done cannot be altered, however, I did learn from it. Thanks for reconsidering your options as an entire staff.

[Fiel]

I've merely closed topics for nip slips. I've never, ever banned someone for a nip slip - those things happen.

[Kawasari Mimoto22]

I've merely closed topics for nip slips. I've never, ever banned someone for a nip slip - those things happen.

I would like to recommend that there should be a small FAQ down at the bottom of the rules thread, in case users has more questions that may not be originally stated in the rules. I've seen it done over in other forums that I was in, so perhaps this would also cause less of a commotion?

[Fiel]

If a user has a question about the R&R, he or she can simply post in the R&R thread. The R&R typically gets updated once every few months because some young whippersnappers do something that the rules don't cover anyhow.

[Sarah]

You claimed to have enabled the private messaging system for banned users, but it doesn't work. If you click private messages it just reloads the infraction page.

As far as everything else goes, I don't really care. I think you're sending the wrong message by saying "go ahead and create another account, you can get away with anything if you're a valued member." I understand this for a permanent ban (re: greg coming back as grog) but if it's a 10 day ban it should be unacceptable. Serve your ban or appeal; if your appeal fails then serve your ban. The people who are accumulating points aren't bad for the site and therefore should never be put on the BoS list, they're just being themselves. But you're almost baiting them into getting BoS/IP'd with this system by encouraging them to immediately come back after a temp ban.

I just served 10 days, I know it's really difficult. 10 days is kind of excessive for someone who's just accumulated points, especially since points last THREE MONTHS. Which, in thinking about it, is also excessive. No one is going to be an angel for three months when they've got 5 - 6 points, and those of us with a penchant for speaking our minds are getting screwed for a quarter of the year, and that's unfair. It's a forum, for god's sake.

And on that note, the whole infraction system is kind of bull. I shouldn't have been banned for what I said. I flamed, I should have been infracted, but what I said was in no way deserving of a ban. I had two points left, I should have been able to slip by with a 1-point infraction for flaming. I could see a two pointer if I was continuously harassing Bomber, but it was an isolated incidence. Rules shouldn't be set in stone, that's a really gross and abusive way to run a community. Everything should be based on circumstances, rules should be a guideline; a reference, not a sentence. Everyone who's a little mean shouldn't immediately be condemned to a ban in their future with certainty. People who push it continuously should, but I was walking on damn eggshells for a month. I had two points left and nothing I said in that post was worth losing both of them.

This is a nice start on a system that needs to be completely rewritten but it's still not good enough, especially if you want a real growing community. People shouldn't live in fear of a heavy-handed moderator giving them ridiculous infractions because it's "the rules." Everything is circumstantial and should be treated as such. I did a lot of reflecting in the last 10 days and I've always known I'm not a great member or role-model by any means, and I'm not passing the blame for the things I've done wrong. But at the same time, the southperry administration is far from perfect so I don't know what you expect from us.

I've got a lot more to say but right now I'm just really flustered. I'm always going to be willing to work with you to make southperry a better place though, and you're always going to need my input. Not just mine, everyone's. I think that gets overlooked a lot.

[Kawasari Mimoto22]

I have a question in regards to the rules. If a member is continuously trolling another member, whether it be visitor-messaging, PMs, threads, individual posts (especially if not in Funhouse), is that bannable or infractionable? That's technically flame-baiting.

PS: I agree with the above posted, she's right. Some of your current members could have been previous administrators, or moderators from other forums (although maybe unrelated to MS), and you wouldn't even know it. -shrug- Some of them can give decent advice. I do notice one thing that I would like to speak up on. Don't play favoritism amongst certain members and letting them do whatever they want.

[Russt]

As far as everything else goes, I don't really care. I think you're sending the wrong message by saying "go ahead and create another account, you can get away with anything if you're a valued member." I understand this for a permanent ban (re: greg coming back as grog) but if it's a 10 day ban it should be unacceptable. Serve your ban or appeal; if your appeal fails then serve your ban. The people who are accumulating points aren't bad for the site and therefore should never be put on the BoS list, they're just being themselves. But you're almost baiting them into getting BoS/IP'd with this system by encouraging them to immediately come back after a temp ban.

I agree.

However, I don't think it would make much sense if 7 points = 10-day person ban while 14 points is "merely" an account ban. If this is to be changed, permanent bans should be accompanied with 10-day person bans as well, i.e. they should not be allowed to come back until after 10 days.


And on that note, the whole infraction system is kind of bull. I shouldn't have been banned for what I said. I flamed, I should have been infracted, but what I said was in no way deserving of a ban. I had two points left, I should have been able to slip by with a 1-point infraction for flaming. I could see a two pointer if I was continuously harassing Bomber, but it was an isolated incidence. Rules shouldn't be set in stone, that's a really gross and abusive way to run a community. Everything should be based on circumstances, rules should be a guideline; a reference, not a sentence. Everyone who's a little mean shouldn't immediately be condemned to a ban in their future with certainty. People who push it continuously should, but I was walking on damn eggshells for a month. I had two points left and nothing I said in that post was worth losing both of them.

Ironically, I think that if you never said "I'm going to get infracted for this" you probably wouldn't have gotten infracted for it. I remember some people were discussing this in IRC and they came to the same conclusion.

[Sarah]

Ironically, I think that if you never said "I'm going to get infracted for this" you probably wouldn't have gotten infracted for it. I remember some people were discussing this in IRC and they came to the same conclusion.

Which is silly. I don't want to get away with things that I shouldn't and EVERY SINGLE TIME I knowingly do something wrong I contact a moderator and tell them so they are aware and can deal with it appropriately. A two-point infraction is far from appropriate and such heavy-handed moderating only causes resentment and leaves me afraid to post, and would do much worse to less vocal members.

[Chompy]

I just served 10 days, I know it's really difficult. 10 days is kind of excessive for someone who's just accumulated points, especially since points last THREE MONTHS. Which, in thinking about it, is also excessive. No one is going to be an angel for three months when they've got 5 - 6 points, and those of us with a penchant for speaking our minds are getting screwed for a quarter of the year, and that's unfair. It's a forum, for god's sake.


I'd like to go ahead and make two points:

1. I have never been banned.
2. The reason I have never been banned is that I am more conservative with my posting when my points are high.

I feel that the system is not excessive in any manner.
And anyone who ventures the funhouse knows I push and push for my pleasure.
Its a game of give and take.

[Rob]

I fail to see why people put so much emphasis on criticizing the infraction and ban system. After all, you shouldn't get infractions or bans at all. I really don't know how can you even get infracted so much, and this is not directed towards anyone.


I'd like to go ahead and make two points:

1. I have never been banned.
2. The reason I have never been banned is that I am more conservative with my posting when my points are high.

I feel that the system is not excessive in any manner.
And anyone who ventures the funhouse knows I push and push for my pleasure.
Its a game of give and take.

Actually what Chompy says is what should really happen.

[Kawasari Mimoto22]

Truth be told, it is harder to:

Accumulate infractions and get banned

vs

Post a picture of pornographic-nature

...and get banned. Think about that, for a moment. Actually, even for a joker like myself, I find it really hard to get infractions. I've gotten mostly warnings, and some infractions during posting here. Only time I got banned was for that one picture.

[Fiel]

BombsAway - why can't you argue more often like you did just now? You called no one an idiot, broke no rules, and still got your point across. I don't think doing this is too much to ask of any member. Following these rules is very simple. Be mindful of what you say to other members and you should be just fine.

I'd agree with you regarding the two points if the rules stated that points are doled out based upon the moderators feelings on what it should be rated, but even that I think is unfair. Everyone on this site receives two points for a flaming infraction or nothing for a warning. It's been like this since day one (or at least, since it was changed to 2 points last year, and that was done with a public notice). How is this heavy-handed at all? It's the same infraction for all people. Read the rules and then you won't be in the same situation you were in ten days ago where you had "to walk on eggshells". If you don't want to be banned, don't push the issue.

Being "a little mean" is not against the rules, and neither is "being aggressive". You can do both and still stay within the confines of the rules. Calling other members idiots or dumbasses (not saying you are, just a hypothetical member), even if all evidence points to it, has no point or relevance in any conversation. Ev-er.

I do take everyone's point of view when deciding things for the forum constantly. I took the forum's opinion on Flugzeug before I did it. I asked users what they thought about moderation in a Democracy poll and amped it up accordingly. I took user's input when creating the Marketplace, and I have even asked users about the possible creation of new boards (boss board, call to action). I asked people what should be done about the Angry Dome. I ask users for their opinions pretty consistently, so I find it surprising that you think everyone's opinions get overlooked.

One last thing, if you run to the police every time you did something wrong, how do you think that would affect your life? If you report yourself for a violation and get marked for it, where's the sense in complaining about that?

[Chompy]

Truth be told, it is harder to:

Accumulate infractions and get banned

vs

Post a picture of pornographic-nature

...and get banned. Think about that, for a moment. Actually, even for a joker like myself, I find it really hard to get infractions. I've gotten mostly warnings, and some infractions during posting here. Only time I got banned was for that one picture.

Imma go ahead and agree.
Pornography should be 2 points under banning.
Repeated usage and obvious abuse of pornography should be a BAN ON SIGHT.

By abuse I mean mults and etc.

[Cactuar]

Never mind, Fiel got my point across quite nicely.

That being said, I've always been a fan of the GFAQs system where moderations aside from warnings, and bans really don't do much to you.

[Rob]

Imma go ahead and agree.
Pornography should be 2 points under banning.
Repeated usage and obvious abuse of pornography should be a BAN ON SIGHT.

By abuse I mean mults and etc.

This is a MapleStory forum Chompy. Porn shouldn't even be present here.

[Chompy]

This is a MapleStory forum Chompy. Porn shouldn't even be present here.

We ride a fine edge on the funhouse.
Also explicit wording would fall under that category.

In my world this is in infinitely grey issue.

Note if one posts an image from www.bigcockspineappleingthings.com.com then yes.
But lets take Takashi Murakami's My lonesome cowboy.
I posted an image but due to the rules immediately changed it to a link.
But its an art piece on par with ancient Greek works so...
Where is the line.

Link to image.
EDITED: :chin:

[Fiel]

Southperotica is the line.

[Kawasari Mimoto22]

This is a MapleStory forum Chompy. Porn shouldn't even be present here.

Your point is? I've been a mod in a general-gaming related forum in which the entire purpose of the forum is for gaming, and gaming only. I've witness pictures of pornographic nature being posted. Though I completely understand your point, it doesn't mean there will be a complete absence of porn. Same goes for trolling. It'll always be there if the user chooses to create it. The correct way to handle this is to find the proper and respective punishment for those violations. First offense, they get this. On 2nd offense, perma-ban, ex.

[Cactuar]

Your point is? I've been a mod in a general-gaming related forum in which the entire purpose of the forum is for gaming, and gaming only. I've witness pictures of pornographic nature being posted. Though I completely understand your point, it doesn't mean there will be a complete absence of porn. Same goes for trolling. It'll always be there if the user chooses to create it. The correct way to handle this is to find the proper and respective punishment for those violations. First offense, they get this. On 2nd offense, perma-ban, ex.

You're acting as though the R&R didn't exist. We DO have proper punishements for it, namely Autoban for porn and 2 infraction points for trolling. Just because something happens to be in a place doesn't mean it belongs nor does it make it appropriate for posting.

[Rob]

Your point is? I've been a mod in a general-gaming related forum in which the entire purpose of the forum is for gaming, and gaming only. I've witness pictures of pornographic nature being posted. Though I completely understand your point, it doesn't mean there will be a complete absence of porn. Same goes for trolling. It'll always be there if the user chooses to create it. The correct way to handle this is to find the proper and respective punishment for those violations. First offense, they get this. On 2nd offense, perma-ban, ex.

That suggestive images or text is okay, porn, like we all acknowledge it, is not. There's no grey zone there.

[Chompy]

That suggestive images or text is okay, porn, like we all acknowledge it, is not. There's no grey zone there.

There is no grey zone on what is pornographic?
I, and thousands of others, would strongly strongly disagree.

[Fiel]

If you think you might be crossing the line with what is pornography, you have already crossed it. It's better to not post and be safe.

[Chompy]

If you think you might be crossing the line with what is pornography, you have already crossed it. It's better to not post and be safe.

I have done that I and still adhere to that.
The link that was chinchilled was originally an image I spoiler posted then edited to a link.

Because I like SP.

[Milelke]

We shouldn't be stretching our freedoms guys.
A forum's structure isn't a democracy :) Admins just want it to seem that way.

And on the topic of porn being allowed... There must something wrong with people to think that it is even slightly acceptable. If you want to look at porn, go to a porn website.

And also. It's ILLEGAL to show porn to anyone under 21/18 (forgot) without a warning.
I don't think we need a "Enter If you are above 21" button on our homepage as a warning.
__________________________________________________ _________________________________________
I honestly think the Warning System is flawed. I think it should be stricter on the topic of people being allowed to make another account.

It's not very hard to avoid warnings and infractions. I myself have NEVER gotten one due to simple self-constraint.

[Heidi]

I think it's 18, unless it's different in different parts of the world

And yeah, wow. I don't get how people could accidentally post porn. Just make it a ban :f7:

[Eos]

Rules shouldn't be set in stone, that's a really gross and abusive way to run a community. Everything should be based on circumstances, rules should be a guideline; a reference, not a sentence.

I disagree with this, Sarah. Punishments are set in stone for your protection. They ensure that everyone is treated equally for doing the same things. Your punishment for a crime should never be based on the subjectivity of the person addressing the crime. You attacked someone I don't like, you only get 1 point. You attacked someone I like, here's 5 points. That is an abusive way to run the community. They're specifically hard coded based on the severity of their social impact (ie: how many strikes you get for each offense, flaming you get 3, 4th is gone). This removes the moderators from having to weigh the severity of your crime and makes them responsible only for determining if one has occurred, reducing variation.

For punishments to be truly fair they need to handed out consistently and enforced equally.

[Sarah]

BombsAway - why can't you argue more often like you did just now? You called no one an idiot, broke no rules, and still got your point across. I don't think doing this is too much to ask of any member. Following these rules is very simple. Be mindful of what you say to other members and you should be just fine.

I do argue like this often, especially on the forums. I'm far more abrasive on IRC but that's because it's active conversation and I'm not thinking about what to say next. I can only think of a few instances on the forums where I've attacked anyone and that's always after long term agitation. I explained my position to Bomber without attacking him in four or five posts in another topic a day earlier and then he brought it into a completely separate topic and started up again. Clearly this doesn't justify my actions but I'm just making the point that it's not like I laid into him after a single post.


I'd agree with you regarding the two points if the rules stated that points are doled out based upon the moderators feelings on what it should be rated, but even that I think is unfair. Everyone on this site receives two points for a flaming infraction or nothing for a warning. It's been like this since day one (or at least, since it was changed to 2 points last year, and that was done with a public notice). How is this heavy-handed at all? It's the same infraction for all people. Read the rules and then you won't be in the same situation you were in ten days ago where you had "to walk on eggshells". If you don't want to be banned, don't push the issue.

I was convinced that I had recieved a single point infraction at one time for flaming but upon looking again, that's not true. However, flaming is really broad and should probably be even further broken up. As far as I'm concerned "flaming" should be a single instance single point infraction if the offense is minor (calling someone dumb, stupid, ugly, etc. Just being mean for little reason.) Someone says something they shouldn't and get a point for it. Harassment, on the other hand, is continued flaming or attacking someone on a personal level (like calling someone a stupid pineappleing papayagot.) These are clearly very different offenses but under the current system are valued equally which allows some people to get away with too much and some people to get away with too little. Granted, there are rarely full-out harassment cases here, but as the community grows there will be and I don't see any reason not to separate them currently besides maybe it being too much work, though really it's not.

But it's a real shame that you think it's okay for your members to feel like they can't speak their mind. That's the message I'm getting from the end of that paragraph. Don't push the issue to me sounds like don't be yourself. I don't push any single issue on the forums, all of my warnings have been single instances. So I don't see any other way that I should take that.


I do take everyone's point of view when deciding things for the forum constantly. I took the forum's opinion on Flugzeug before I did it. I asked users what they thought about moderation in a Democracy poll and amped it up accordingly. I took user's input when creating the Marketplace, and I have even asked users about the possible creation of new boards (boss board, call to action). I asked people what should be done about the Angry Dome. I ask users for their opinions pretty consistently, so I find it surprising that you think everyone's opinions get overlooked.

When it comes to things of little importance or general interest you're open but look, 50% of the suggestions forum is locked. Some of those ideas are awful but there are some good discussions that just get ignored or dismissed. Swerve made a thread on this very subject just a few days ago and you (or eos? one of you) said it didn't need to be revised but here we are, with your new banning standards and expectations. I was watching and didn't see this brought up to the public at all before you posted this. In general I've found you to be very dismissive about things you don't agree with. That's hypocritical for me to say because... ahha, but I'm not a leader here.


One last thing, if you run to the police every time you did something wrong, how do you think that would affect your life? If you report yourself for a violation and get marked for it, where's the sense in complaining about that?

You're not the police, though, and nothing I did or have ever done is comparable to something anyone would report to the police. But, for the sake of argument, if I were to kill someone and went to the police myself; I'd still be punished but you can bet your bottom dollar the punishment would be far less than if I ignored it or ran away from it. If I am going to be mean in real life I will make it a point to warn people before hand, and I would excuse myself afterward, knowing what I've done isn't the right thing to do. This has happened before. I take responsibility for my actions when I know I'm at fault, and while I shouldn't get a reduced punishment for it, I shouldn't get punished MORE for being accountable. It was said that I wouldn't have recieved the infraction had I not said anything. How is that fair? It's not like the post had a good chance of being missed, it was in the current most popular thread in one of the most active forums. I should've been punished regardless, it's a problem if the moderation here only finds it necessary to infract those who admit to their faults.




I disagree with this, Sarah. Punishments are set in stone for your protection. They ensure that everyone is treated equally for doing the same things. Your punishment for a crime should never be based on the subjectivity of the person addressing the crime. You attacked someone I don't like, you only get 1 point. You attacked someone I like, here's 5 points. That is an abusive way to run the community. They're specifically hard coded based on the severity of their social impact (ie: how many strikes you get for each offense, flaming you get 3, 4th is gone). This removes the moderators from having to weigh the severity of your crime and makes them responsible only for determining if one has occurred, reducing variation.

For punishments to be truly fair they need to handed out consistently and enforced equally.

You're right that it shouldn't be about your feelings for the member but that's not what I meant at all. It should be entirely based on circumstance, not feelings. If I punch someone for no reason I'm going to be charged. If I punch someone who's attacking me I'm going to get a break. Not all punchs should be treated the same. In this case I verbally attacked someone who had (imo) provoked me for several days beforehand, and in any justice system that would be taken into account when dealing out the punishment. That may make more work for the moderation team but that's your job. Everything isn't black and white. As a moderator you should be willing to do some investigation. The job is a responsibility.

Here's another case of an infraction I recieved but do not agree with (not bringing these up to contend them, just to make points.) A few weeks ago that death123 person was in the social section asking people personal questions, and it was clear that he was just screwing around but other people didn't seem to get that, and so they kept trying to help him by telling their own stories which were mostly terribly embarrassing. My fears of him being a troll were confirmed by the end of his stay and I called him out on it so others would recognise it and stop. I didn't want anyone else to be embarrassed and I spoke out in order to prevent that and draw attention to the situtation. Obviously the appropriate thing to do would have been to call a mod but what I did wasn't harmful in anyway, and yet I recieved a 1 point infraction for a trolling accusation. I am completely against falsely calling people trolls and have spoken out on that subject quite often and the rule against trolling accusations was put in place. This rule should be used to stop people from throwing it around and discrediting other posters but there are certain cases, this one specifically, where it's necessary to call someone out to prevent harm to others. Trolling accusations specifically should be based on the users history and not on their single post. If you feel you don't know the user well enough to determine whether their use was appropriate or if this sort of behaviour (repeatedly calling someone like Greg a troll is borderline harassment anyway) has been continuous, you should take it up with the other moderators before issuing an infraction. I'm sure there's a mod forum for exactly this purpose.

Running out of steam.

[Russt]

When it comes to things of little importance or general interest you're open but look, 50% of the suggestions forum is locked.

Not only is this an exaggeration, most locked suggestion threads are resolved (or decidedly unresolvable) issues.

[Eos]

If I punch someone for no reason I'm going to be charged. If I punch someone who's attacking me I'm going to get a break.


Self defense only works if your life was in danger, or you can legitimately claim to have felt it was. You're perfectly safe from cyber-flames, so firing back is never truly a defensive tactic, it's trying to out-offensive the other side until they back down.

[IsaacGS]

You're right that it shouldn't be about your feelings for the member but that's not what I meant at all. It should be entirely based on circumstance, not feelings. If I punch someone for no reason I'm going to be charged. If I punch someone who's attacking me I'm going to get a break. Not all punchs should be treated the same. In this case I verbally attacked someone who had (imo) provoked me for several days beforehand, and in any justice system that would be taken into account when dealing out the punishment. That may make more work for the moderation team but that's your job. Everything isn't black and white. As a moderator you should be willing to do some investigation. The job is a responsibility.
On this respect, there are already situations where I do take this into account. For example, the vast majority of the time, if someone had previously no infractions, especially if they're a new user, and they have done something wrong, then I'll give them a warning first, prompting them to review the rules so that they can avoid receiving a full infraction in the future. This is pretty much the only case where I can reasonably take the circumstances of the situation into account. It's too much to ask that we review the entire post history of everyone in the dispute before dealing out any infractions. By the time such a thorough investigation were finished, people would be complaining about receiving infractions about posts they made weeks into the past. I see your point but I just don't think it's a reasonable expectation. In your example there, the proper thing to do would probably have been to report the thread, or at least mention it to one of the mods so that they could look over the thread or that person as a whole. Almost everyone's going to believe their trolling accusation is accurate, so they'd all feel as fully justified to post it as you did. That just puts us back at square one, with "troll" being thrown around like crazy. Hell, if you really wanted to, you could put together a pile of evidence of why this person is a troll and include it with your report. Bottom line is, no matter how sure you are, it's against the rules to call someone a troll.

[Sarah]

Self defense only works if your life was in danger, or you can legitimately claim to have felt it was. You're perfectly safe from cyber-flames, so firing back is never truly a defensive tactic, it's trying to out-offensive the other side until they back down.

...that's not the point. Your punishment for punching someone would be invariably worse if you're the aggressor. The law may be that "your life must be in danger" but most sensible judges won't put you away if you were only defending yourself (judge judy being one of the exceptions, haha. (Also punishment would be completely circumstantial. Of course you'd probably end up with a lawsuit if you busted someones tooth or something in retaliation.)) And I never claimed that "firing-back" was defensive, but it was the result of repeated aggravation, just as it would be if someone snapped at you in real life for being obnoxious. Being annoyed at someone and saying something as mild as "you're dumb" shouldn't be weighed the same as a malicious attack.

edit:


On this respect, there are already situations where I do take this into account. For example, the vast majority of the time, if someone had previously no infractions, especially if they're a new user, and they have done something wrong, then I'll give them a warning first, prompting them to review the rules so that they can avoid receiving a full infraction in the future. This is pretty much the only case where I can reasonably take the circumstances of the situation into account. It's too much to ask that we review the entire post history of everyone in the dispute before dealing out any infractions. By the time such a thorough investigation were finished, people would be complaining about receiving infractions about posts they made weeks into the past. I see your point but I just don't think it's a reasonable expectation. In your example there, the proper thing to do would probably have been to report the thread, or at least mention it to one of the mods so that they could look over the thread or that person as a whole. Almost everyone's going to believe their trolling accusation is accurate, so they'd all feel as fully justified to post it as you did. That just puts us back at square one, with "troll" being thrown around like crazy. Hell, if you really wanted to, you could put together a pile of evidence of why this person is a troll and include it with your report. Bottom line is, no matter how sure you are, it's against the rules to call someone a troll.

For the record I actually did do this on IRC and Fiel completely dismissed it.

And as a moderator/admin it's your job to be paying attention to the users. Some users will slip under your radar, of course, but that's why there's a TEAM. You shouldn't have to review anyone's entire history but you should be able to put two and two together just from general posting habits. Even as a regular member I could sum up most other members and what their intentions are when posting because it's usually very obvious. If I say I'm against improperly calling people trolls and argue about it countless times, when the time comes that I actually call someone a troll that should be taken into account. The trolling accusation rule should be a deterrent from using the word all of the time like what was happening, not from using the word when appropriate.

[Eos]

...that's not the point. Your punishment for punching someone would be invariably worse if you're the aggressor. The law may be that "your life must be in danger" but most sensible judges won't put you away if you were only defending yourself (judge judy being one of the exceptions, haha. (Also punishment would be completely circumstantial. Of course you'd probably end up with a lawsuit if you busted someones tooth or something in retaliation.)) And I never claimed that "firing-back" was defensive, but it was the result of repeated aggravation, just as it would be if someone snapped at you in real life for being obnoxious. Being annoyed at someone and saying something as mild as "you're dumb" shouldn't be weighed the same as a malicious attack.


I think you missed the point that the situations themselves are just not comparable. Being jumped in an alley is nothing at all like an online argument with someone. There's no need to swing at all, so anyone swinging is equally guilty and equally the aggressor. "He provoked me" isn't applicable when you have ample time to think before you react and know the consequences.



For the record I actually did do this on IRC and Fiel completely dismissed it.

Report feature = More mods to see, better chance of one of them caring and/or having time to look.

[Fiel]

Yes, you did do that on IRC, and then you left immediately. I couldn't even talk with you.

For the record, what Swerve wanted was not a good idea. He wanted a democratic system for bannings, and as with Flugzeug, democratic infraction systems don't work on a forum as there's too much bickering. So yes, he wanted a change to the moderation system, but definitely not the changes that I put in place. You're grasping at straws here and painting me to look like something I'm not and that bothers me.


But it's a real shame that you think it's okay for your members to feel like they can't speak their mind. That's the message I'm getting from the end of that paragraph. Don't push the issue to me sounds like don't be yourself. I don't push any single issue on the forums, all of my warnings have been single instances. So I don't see any other way that I should take that.

Definitely a straw man here. You're building up this argument about what I said ("don't be yourself", which isn't even close to what I said) and then attacking it. What I'm saying is that if you don't want to be banned, don't create situations where you could be banned. Simple as that.

[Sarah]

Yes, you did do that on IRC, and then you left immediately. I couldn't even talk with you..

I was referring to my "trolling accusation" point. I didn't want to contend the ban.

[Kalovale]

As well demonstrated on page 1, you can get your points across without kicking up dust here and there just fine. I think it's not about whether or not to address your opinions if they prove to be offensive, but the way you address them. While it is a matter of individual personalities to decide how rigorous/reserved one tends to be, not breaching the borderlines of "attacking other users" doesn't in anyway limit you from what you can potentially say, or what you will eventually say.

"You're an idiot.." and "I don't think that is very wise of you.." convey the same message, one nets you possible satisfaction plus an additional infraction point, the other does neither, and not everyone takes pleasure from attacking other people. I see more harm than good in being overly critical. You have time to think, think.

If you don't think the latter statement does justice to your intention behind the post, you're most likely trying to attack and spite the person just because, and that attitude alone deserves an infraction.

[Blaine]

If you can argue without insulting people, Sarah, do it. There's no reason to insult someone on a forum, of all places.

I think the way this forum is run is brilliant. There's got to be something good going on in the mod forum, because there's no hate bannings, (I know there has to be at least one mod that fairly heavily dislikes at least one member of this forum), and you have 7, seven, SEVEN points before you get a ten day ban, then you're given a whole new chance. Start over! You get to accumulate SEVEN more points, before you're totally banned. I remember when this kid was being foolish around the Warrior forum and a bit in the old General Maple forum, and I thought I fairly well torched his ass, and I thought I'd get infracted for it..but no, I only got a warning. After that I thought to myself, "What the pineapple are these guys doing to get banned left and right? It isn't that hard to stay within the lines here."

I'm gonna bypass the swear filter in here, look away if you don't want at least a mild amount of cussing.

Is there really a need to insult someone? If some random prick over Xbox Live said something to me or Berzerk like "You're a cock sucking piece of shit," are we going to care? No. Because it's some random that has no connection to our life, and an insult from such a person is nearly worthless. Doubly so for something like being called a dumbass on a Maplestory forum. The only reasons for insulting someone are:

a) You can't be bothered to think of something better.

or

b) You don't think they're smart enough to fight with logic.

or

c) You yourself can't think of anything better to say.

or, finally,

d) You know it will get to them.

That last reason is probably the most used one. If you dislike someone and you know they're insecure about...oh..say...them being poor, you're probably going to make poor person jokes at them. The same goes for swearing versus not swearing; if people didn't think anything of the words, they wouldn't really have any meaning and hardly anyone would swear, unless they think it makes them sound cool, which means them assuming that other people think the words mean a lot. If you respect the person enough to give them the opportunity to use logic, then there's no reason to swear or to insult them. I personally don't think Maple is something worth fighting or swearing over...to be honest.
Fiel would never ask us to be anything but ourselves, just to slightly curtail our actions to fit to a pretty loose set of rules. If people weren't allowed to be themselves, would Alloy have Goggles? Fiel have his chinchillas everywhere? I be allowed to post in what some people call blinding red font? (:kiss: To you.) Probably not. I've seen a lot of forums that are a lot closer to dictatorship than this one. Fiel, Isaac, Ryan, and the others aren't out of line for suggesting that we adhere to a few rules. They don't want to have to run a veritable mosh pit. If you can't argue a point without bluntly going out and calling someone a dumbass...shoo.

I think the infraction system is fine...it didn't even need to be changed. Common sense is supposed to be the first step, and that should eliminate the need for an infraction system...but apparently that isn't used here...in a lot of cases.

Hur hur, no pictures, you pervs.

This isn't the place for porn guys...it's a forum mostly centered around a 2D game that's marketed for children under 15. If you're looking for porn, go to Brazzers or RedTube. If you want erotic anime...use 4chan or Sankaku. Come on now...this isn't Southperotica, like Fiel said.
THESE RULES AREN'T THAT HARD TO FOLLOW.

Edit: Sarah...you can only take situational decisions so far. Would it be fair if I wrote out a large string of cuss words directed negatively towards you and had the mods write it off because Isaac and Fiel are two of the best friends I've taken from my tenure on Maple? No. You shouldn't need situational judgement on a forum, and if you're letting someone get to you over time, ignore them, block them so you don't see their stuff, do something about it. If you let someone agitate you in more than one thread, step away for a while. At least find time to come up with a response that won't get you infracted. That's probably a forum discussion's best tool: Time. You have as long as you need to think of a witty comeback that won't get you banned. I'm sure you can think of something that doesn't involve cussing or insults in a few hours, there's no deadline on replying to whatever he/she said.

Think about something before you do it, and if you're even in doubt about whether or not it'll get you infracted, don't do it.

[Bomber]

You claimed to have enabled the private messaging system for banned users, but it doesn't work. If you click private messages it just reloads the infraction page.

As far as everything else goes, I don't really care. I think you're sending the wrong message by saying "go ahead and create another account, you can get away with anything if you're a valued member." I understand this for a permanent ban (re: greg coming back as grog) but if it's a 10 day ban it should be unacceptable. Serve your ban or appeal; if your appeal fails then serve your ban. The people who are accumulating points aren't bad for the site and therefore should never be put on the BoS list, they're just being themselves. But you're almost baiting them into getting BoS/IP'd with this system by encouraging them to immediately come back after a temp ban.

I just served 10 days, I know it's really difficult. 10 days is kind of excessive for someone who's just accumulated points, especially since points last THREE MONTHS. Which, in thinking about it, is also excessive. No one is going to be an angel for three months when they've got 5 - 6 points, and those of us with a penchant for speaking our minds are getting screwed for a quarter of the year, and that's unfair. It's a forum, for god's sake.

And on that note, the whole infraction system is kind of bull. I shouldn't have been banned for what I said. I flamed, I should have been infracted, but what I said was in no way deserving of a ban. I had two points left, I should have been able to slip by with a 1-point infraction for flaming. I could see a two pointer if I was continuously harassing Bomber, but it was an isolated incidence. Rules shouldn't be set in stone, that's a really gross and abusive way to run a community. Everything should be based on circumstances, rules should be a guideline; a reference, not a sentence. Everyone who's a little mean shouldn't immediately be condemned to a ban in their future with certainty. People who push it continuously should, but I was walking on damn eggshells for a month. I had two points left and nothing I said in that post was worth losing both of them.

This is a nice start on a system that needs to be completely rewritten but it's still not good enough, especially if you want a real growing community. People shouldn't live in fear of a heavy-handed moderator giving them ridiculous infractions because it's "the rules." Everything is circumstantial and should be treated as such. I did a lot of reflecting in the last 10 days and I've always known I'm not a great member or role-model by any means, and I'm not passing the blame for the things I've done wrong. But at the same time, the southperry administration is far from perfect so I don't know what you expect from us.

I've got a lot more to say but right now I'm just really flustered. I'm always going to be willing to work with you to make southperry a better place though, and you're always going to need my input. Not just mine, everyone's. I think that gets overlooked a lot.

Ehhh, I got infracted too. I say I deserved it in a sense. But we all share our times.
Just be thankful we don't get perma banned for 7 infactions.
-4 points here, don't be so harsh about it.-
Edit: After reading my ign twice, I already feel dumb.