Clear set punishments for misdemeanors.

T runner

It seems to me that there is a lot of discretion given to moderators in imposing lenghts of bans for misdemeanors.

If there was a clear ban lenght for different types of misdemeanors it would make things easier for moderators and protect them from accusations of unfairness or picking on particular posters etc. As well as taking a lot of traffic off the helpdesk which seems to spend a lot of time wrapped up in subjective judgements.

E.g insulting behaviour-infraction, very insulting behaviour=short ban, 2 infractions = short ban, criticising moderation in a post = short ban etc.

That way the mod can simply point to the chart to prove his/her fairness as can the admins on the helpdesk.

Any thoughts?

Blowfish

It's impossible to create a 'standard' banning template because of the inherent differences between the forums.

Forums like PI will always be 'stricter' than AH or the Thunderdome.

Having a template for each forum will have it's own problems too as it will lead to the inevitable complaints of 'How come I got banned for two weeks here for doing x, when in forum y I would have only gotten a one week ban?'

Gordon

Having strict punishments for set crimes will happen when everyone is consistant in their misdemeanors: until the human aspect of breaking rules is removed, the punishment will fit the crime.

orestes

Can you define "insulting behaviour", "very insulting behaviour", etc?

There is no possible way to make a black and white rule on these things, every modding action is unique due to the very nature of this site and of conversation and interaction in general. These decisions are always going to be judgement calls, and they are made by the mods as we have been trusted by the owners of this site and the other admins to make them.

There are processes in place for users to question these judgements, and the admins will look at them and do what they feel is fairest from an impartial point of view. Just because a user/mod does not like an admin decision, does not mean it is the wrong one. They are the ones who ultimitely deal with the running of this site, so if they make wrong calls and they are the wrong ones for the site as a whole then ultimitely on their heads be it. They do what is best for boards.ie, and what's best for boards is a fair and impartial appeal system, which is what help desk is for.

Yes, we mess up occasionally (I'm not saying anyone has here btw, just talking in general terms), but if we were to mess up a lot or to take the piss with our modding our modships would be called into question and possibly revoked. You don't think the admins would let us run riot on their site do you?

Man, my posts today are way longer than I mean them to be when I start typing, weird

nesf

Although I prefer personally to hand out the similar bans for similar offences I think writing it in stone doesn't work, it's all about the context. Insulting someone can vary from a quiet word to a permanent ban depending on the poster's past behaviour, previous bans, the specific type of abuse used etc. If we did put something in writing it'd have to be so loosely worded and open to change that it'd confuse more than it would clear up.

Also, putting it in writing just invites rules lawyers who'll try to escape punishment due to some technicality which is something we could all do without.

Nevyn

Bans are accumulative.
what may seem to be a harsh 3 months ban for a smart arse comment can be due to the poster not learning or refusing to stick by the rules of the forum and they can have been banned a few time before.

Dudess

T runner, moderators are non professionals, volunteers and above all, humans. I've always tried my best to be very fair and impartial when moderating but I would still say it's extremely difficult for moderators to be 100% impeccably consistent all the time - in fact it's impossible. You can't expect moderators to be infallible, just to do their best.

AckwelFoley

The best way of avoiding inconsistant modding is to steer clear of being an asshat and thus avoiding a their wrath.

works a treat.

seamus

While theoretically the idea has merit, it would be next to impossible to implement.

You would have to structure it by saying that offence type X can incur anything from an infraction to an X day ban.

Of course, offence type X becomes a huge category. If you were to put "insulting behaviour" in as an offence type, then that covers everything from, "Don't be so silly. You're silly.", to a five-page tirade against an individual. Which means that the possible punishments for offences in this category range from an on-thread warning to a permanent siteban.

And you can extend that out for all categories of offence. The only solution then is to specifically mention offences, as opposed to categories of offences. And we're just not going to do that because then someone will moan and whine when they get banned for something which hadn't been specifically outlined as an offence.

The Ambassador Admins are finalising a "rules" package which should clarify exactly what's expected of *all* users, but by and large the general sentiment in it is, "Don't be a dick". Where "being a dick" covers everything from personal abuse to upsetting threads with off-topic arguing.

Beruthiel

snyper wrote: »

The best way of avoiding inconsistant modding is to steer clear of being an asshat and thus avoiding a their rath.

works a treat.

This would also be my answer to this thread.
99.9% of people seem to manage to do the above every day on this site.

You can make rules up the wazoo and you will always have someone try to argue their way around them.

stovelid

There's also the situation where two different types of users break the same rule. I think it's fair that a normally well-behaved poster who loses it very rarely should get the benefit of the doubt over a serial WUM.

Kinetic^

stovelid wrote: »

There's also the situation where two different types of users break the same rule. I think it's fair that a normally well-behaved poster who loses it very rarely should get the benefit of the doubt over a serial WUM.

This is not just the site, it's life. It happens all the time and I'd be more likely to give a lesser ban to someone who is an outstanding poster then to someone who is a 2 post wonder. Saying that it depends on the severity of the crime. If someone posts about how to get isos/warez/hacked games on the game forums then it's an instant 3 month ban, no matter who you are. If it's something like being abusive then I'd tend to review it on a case by case basis. This is how things work in courts, not just on the internet.

Edit: just like to add that given te games catergories are generally trouble free, the busier mods may have to say something different. Just my take on it.

Rb

If you just avoid AH, you'll pretty much avoid all the inconsistent moderation on Boards.ie.

AckwelFoley

Rb wrote: »

If you just avoid AH, you'll pretty much avoid all the inconsistent moderation on Boards.ie.

ah does not reflect the internet, in the same way liveline does for radio broadcasting.

Captain Darling

Rb wrote: »

If you just avoid AH, you'll pretty much avoid all the inconsistent moderation on Boards.ie.

Ughhh, those grapes taste very sour. :pac:

There is merit in what the OP has said, however it's simply not practicable, due to the variety of fora, and the level of strictness that needs to applied relative to the individual forum.

Contrasting AH with PI, as somebody has said already i think, is the perfect example of this.

tbh

T runner wrote: »

E.g insulting behaviour-infraction, very insulting behaviour=short ban, 2 infractions = short ban, criticising moderation in a post = short ban etc.

That way the mod can simply point to the chart to prove his/her fairness as can the admins on the helpdesk.

Any thoughts?

Yes, two. Who decides on the difference between insulting behaviour, and very insulting behaviour? Who decides on the meaning of "short"?

Wouldn't enforcing your scheme require

T runner wrote: »

some level of discretion given to moderators

?

stovelid

Kinetic^ wrote: »

Saying that it depends on the severity of the crime. If someone posts about how to get isos/warez/hacked games on the game forums then it's an instant 3 month ban, no matter who you are.

True. Hadn't really thought of that. Didn't have straightforward digressions like that in mind, more so abuse and the like.

5starpool

Every forum is different tbh. All bans etc are given in the context of the forum and their own posting history generally.