Moderation Point System Discussion

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

2 hours ago, SDS said:

 

A structure will help mod to mod variability and keep the insults down a little.

 

...just a quick thought SDS....I could see development of a structure as an arduous task and undertaking.....I can only assume that such structure would result from a consensus among MODS....even with an agreed upon structure, it would STILL be open to individual interpretation as the current "structure" is.....I'll guess (COUGH) that there are some now who are heavy handed interpreters and others not so, resulting in inconsistencies of infractions....that's human nature period and NOT unique to MODS here......and some MODS have their favorite personal targets to impugn with points, etc.....you can't change that either...it's human nature......I'd say all forums are well under control except for the "wild wild West PPP".......BUT...it is a release forum which helps to keep all other forums civil and more MOD manageable, a wise move..however there are some posters who exploit that relaxed moderation and become beyond obnoxious, only to troll post for the purpose of incite, foment, vitriol et al......certainly politics are rough and tumble, but there are those there daily who have NO interest in minimalist decorum or discussions of opposing views....apologize for my ramble babble.....

[Dablitzkrieg]

2 minutes ago, SDS said:

 

But for what it is worth, no actions were taken on point total.

Actions in what way?  I think that is my point.  I think the never expiring point system should be revised.

Edited September 29, 2020 by Dablitzkrieg

[Lieutenant Aldo Raine]

I appreciate what you moderators do and have to put up with.  As long as posters can still post a picture of Kay Adams, I'm okay.   

 

Edited September 29, 2020 by Lieutenant Aldo Raine

[Kirby Jackson]

3 hours ago, SDS said:

Hey everyone... 3-0!!! How 'bout them Bills??? Let's keep it going.... 👊

 

I'd like to ask for constructive input on community moderation. Our software has a ton of features that we have never used and it may be time to provide some structure. I'm hoping that provides a more methodical and more informed way to keep this train chugging along in a smooth way. FYI, off-topic/"funny"/inappropriate posts will be deleted. Here is what I want to know:

 

1. We have several default areas of concern: Politics, COVID-19, Inappropriate Language, Abusive Behavior, Inappropriate Avatar, Topic Bumping. Are there any other typical bad posts that fall into a category I am missing?

 

2. Each of those categories have default point values from 0-5. What do you think they should be?

 

3. What should happen to a member if they rack up X number of points? (Each time that get a point - the user is warned.) This can range from being able to read and not post to removing all access to the community.

 

4. Should points expire? If so, how long should they remain?

 

5. Should there be an appeals process (post restriction/banning) and what would this look like?

 

This is just feedback. We may disagree on what you say. Your feedback may not be feasible either. regardless, thoughtful replies are appreciated.

 

Thanks.

1.) I think it’s hard to regulate the Covid/politics as their is so much crossover right now. The most recent Bills press release is even about it. This should be okay as long as people are respectful. When the topic turns and people cross the line that will fall to the abusive behavior IMO. 
 

2.) Abusive behavior would be 4 points for me. Crusading would be 2 but probably should have some sort of warning first because this can get blurry. What’s a crusade vs. a long discussion on a topic? Thread bumping would be 1. Duplicate threads would be 1 as well. 
 

3.) 8 points result is a month suspension. When you come back 1/2 of those points are pulled. You lose 2 points a month over each of the next 2. That way if you come back from a suspension and are abusive in month 1 you are out again. That’s the most serious offense on here IMO.

 

4.) Points should certainly expire. 2 points a month should come off.

 

5.) Yeah, I think that things can occasionally be blurry. Maybe some sort of “board of members” or mods review it? There would be some criteria for who would be eligible (well behaved and veteran posters). This group would seem to have TBD’s best interest at heart. Maybe like 11 people and 6 votes will overturn it? I think you need a decent sized group in order to be fair. 
 

Just my $.02 and thanks as always @SDS for letting us weigh in.

[Saint Doug]

3 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:

As a well grizzled veteran of the Warning Points System, I'd say it's pretty good as it is.

 

My only suggestions:

 

4. Points should expire after a certain amount of time. 1 year?

 

5. The poster side of me wants an appeals process, but I know without a doubt that would just be a world of stupid BS for you mods to deal with since EVERYONE would appeal.

Lol! I still have 2 warning points I got in 2013! I just assumed we are labeled for life and would feel lost if someone snatched them from me at this point. Funny thing is, one was for suggesting Dareus had a poor attitude in life. No cuss or derogatory words. The other was suggesting someone’s post was a troll post. 
 

It’s about time the warning system stepped into the 20th Century. Taking out any human element to this process is a step in the right direction. 

[Gugny]

3 hours ago, SDS said:

1. We have several default areas of concern: Politics, COVID-19, Inappropriate Language, Abusive Behavior, Inappropriate Avatar, Topic Bumping. Are there any other typical bad posts that fall into a category I am missing?

Thinly/or not-so-thinly veiled racism/bigotry.

 

2. Each of those categories have default point values from 0-5. What do you think they should be?

Racism/Bigotry - 5

Abusive Behavior - 4

Inappropriate Language - 3

Politics, Covid-19 - 2

Topic Bumping, Innapp. Avatar - 1

 

3. What should happen to a member if they rack up X number of points? (Each time that get a point - the user is warned.) This can range from being able to read and not post to removing all access to the community.

 

4. Should points expire? If so, how long should they remain?

Our attendance policy at work runs on a rolling 6-month window.  We count any call-out as an occurrence.  Call-out the day before/after a paid holiday is two occurrences.  Consecutive call-outs are 1-2 for the first, followed by .5 for those immediately following.  With the rolling period, any occurrences accrued  through Jan. - June would count.  We have parameters for different levels of discipline.  6 = verbal; 8 = written; 10 = final; 12 = termination.  Once July hits, any January occurrences fall off (Feb. - July); in August, Feb. occurrences fall off, etc.  Not sure if this is possible, but it helps people out if they have a "bad stretch," but otherwise have good attendance (behavior in this case).  A shorter rolling period might work better here.

 

5. Should there be an appeals process (post restriction/banning) and what would this look like?

I think a group IM with mod(s) involved, you and the offender would be fair/quick.  Without going into any detail, I've been the victim of a mod with a vengeance and it wasn't fun, nor was it fair.  Once the suspension is handed down, there's no way to speak to anyone more rational.  When that results in 50 days suspended in a 2-month period, something is clearly wrong.  I think a simple conversation could prevent stuff like this from happening.  I know I've had these types of conversations with current mods fairly recently and it always ends well. This is no longer a problem for me and I've not heard of it being a problem for anyone else; you just never know what the future could hold.

 

 

 

[stosh64]

Sorry, didn't think it was O/T.  I was just curious if there was somewhere I could find out what points do.  I never thought to look until yesterday, I don't plan on needing to look in the future either.  I think, since you asked, maybe points should go away over time.

 

[SDS]

Just as a reminder, there are a lot of variations of opinions here and even if we decide to go in a different direction, your voice was heard and accounted for. Thanks.

[formerlyofCtown]

3 hours ago, Lfod said:

In my opinion, off topic post/responses and abusive behavior is what I would treat the harshest. I'm not as bothered by a lot of the other stuff listed but that's just me. 

 

I think sometimes you really have to just look at things on a case to case basis and factor in a persons history of behavior. 

 

I can only say that I think moderation is already good. 

I'm not sure what is meant by off topic post but to me I don't think they should be grouped with off topic behavior.  You would lose a lot of your veteran posters depending on how you define off topic behavior.  You wouldn't want that, after all it's the posters that make the site not the other way around IMO.

 

If someone could clarify what is meant by off topic that could result in suspension or banning.

Edited September 29, 2020 by formerlyofCtown

[machine gun kelly]

Sds, seriously thanks for this topic, and appreciate the desire to get some opinions.  You guys are great!

[KD in CA]

I honestly thought this was going to be a proposal about rating moderators!

 

I'm not a fan of the idea in general, but to answer the specific questions:

 

1.  Individuals who start too many threads.   

2.  Abusive behavior - 3

      Spam/Troll/Topic starter abuse/Generally inane posting - 2

      Circumventing swear filter - 1

      Everything else - 0

 

-It seems to me politics has been effectively handled for a long time. 

-I haven't seen an inappropriate avatar in years, seem like 90% would be caught at registration.

-COVID:  We have a closely monitored 'facts only' thread, so seems like we could have a 'COVID and football' thread that is a little more open.

-Thread bumping isn't epidemic and can be effectively handled via thread locking/merging (which I think is a great way to keep the board clean).

 

3.  Bans (esp long term/permanent bans) should be for spammers, trolls, and people who get WAY out of line, but not for stepping on someone's toes or one relatively harmless comment.

 

4. Yes, within a month or two.  Idea should be to weed out repeat offenders and those folks tend to burn out quickly.

 

5. Yes, via trial by a jury of their peers.  It could be fun.....we'll do it over on PPP.  I'm getting excited just thinking about the Voir dire process.

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

I think points should expire after some time period

 

Should be different levels of offenses, minor one point, to more majors 3 points.

 

You go over a certain amount first time in time out is a short period, 2nd offense within short period of time gets a longer time out.

 

Who how do you decide what's point worthy?  I'd assume a mod seeing something out of line.  Do mods see/read every post though, doubtful not on some of these threads that have a new page every 15 minutes, things easily slip through unnoticed.

 

Maybe to my point above if missed, you get bonus (minus) points for ratting someone out!!

[Simon]

28 minutes ago, KD in CA said:

I honestly thought this was going to be a proposal about rating moderators!

 

 

 

Now that would be awesome!

Can we bring back ICE for this 

(sorry sds, couldn't resist this idea;-)

[dpberr]

I think the excessive copying and pasting of Twitter feeds could be managed better.

 

Some posters get so wound up trying to defend a point that they wallpaper a thread with long or multiple Twitter excerpts from all over the world. 

 

The thread then becomes pages of Twitter posts and lesser amounts of authentic poster commentary. 

[SDS]

4 minutes ago, Simon said:

 

Now that would be awesome!

Can we bring back ICE for this 

(sorry sds, couldn't resist this idea;-)

I just got a case of the red ass.

[clayboy54]

I believe that any topic that devolves into a discussion on racism, political correctness or Trump vs whoever, should be penalized most harshly. It brings out the worst in all of us and I for one cannot help posting sarcastic responses to those posts. Then, I get my butt in a sling with the mods.
 

I think anything else is fair play.

 

And, of course, any personal attacks directed at an individual should result in a ban.
 

I do believe that a limit to new topics would be nice, because it can get ridiculous to have so many posts that have no merit.

[Just Jack]

4 hours ago, SDS said:

4. Should points expire? If so, how long should they remain?

 

I remember there was a way when warning points were given, you could also set a time period for automatic removal. Depending on the reason for a point, there could be a set time period for when it is removed. For example, inappropriate language, one month. Abusive behavior towards other posters, 1 year. 

[Real McClappy]

1 hour ago, SDS said:

 

But for what it is worth, no actions were taken on point total.

5 points in a year should be a temp ban for X amount of time. Come back on probation and give a 1 strike rule before perm ban. 

 

Remove 1 point a year.

 

Edited September 29, 2020 by Real McNasty

[Rico]

5 hours ago, SDS said:

Hey everyone... 3-0!!! How 'bout them Bills??? Let's keep it going.... 👊

 

I'd like to ask for constructive input on community moderation. Our software has a ton of features that we have never used and it may be time to provide some structure. I'm hoping that provides a more methodical and more informed way to keep this train chugging along in a smooth way. FYI, off-topic/"funny"/inappropriate posts will be deleted. Here is what I want to know:

 

1. We have several default areas of concern: Politics, COVID-19, Inappropriate Language, Abusive Behavior, Inappropriate Avatar, Topic Bumping. Are there any other typical bad posts that fall into a category I am missing?

 

2. Each of those categories have default point values from 0-5. What do you think they should be?

 

3. What should happen to a member if they rack up X number of points? (Each time that get a point - the user is warned.) This can range from being able to read and not post to removing all access to the community.

 

4. Should points expire? If so, how long should they remain?

 

5. Should there be an appeals process (post restriction/banning) and what would this look like?

 

This is just feedback. We may disagree on what you say. Your feedback may not be feasible either. regardless, thoughtful replies are appreciated.

 

Thanks.

1+2.

Politics 5 (absolutely the lamest)

COVID 4 (zzzzzzzz)

Abusive Behavior 1 (sometimes deserved + can be entertaining)

Language 0 (don't care)

Topic Bumping 0 (don't care)

 

3. Don't care.

 

4. Don't care.

 

5. Appeal your case to the admin/mod of your choice. No formal appeals board, cause you may get stuck with an overzealous mod or posters.

 

[muppy]

5 hours ago, SDS said:

Hey everyone... 3-0!!! How 'bout them Bills??? Let's keep it going.... 👊

 

I'd like to ask for constructive input on community moderation. Our software has a ton of features that we have never used and it may be time to provide some structure. I'm hoping that provides a more methodical and more informed way to keep this train chugging along in a smooth way. FYI, off-topic/"funny"/inappropriate posts will be deleted. Here is what I want to know:

 

1. We have several default areas of concern: Politics, COVID-19, Inappropriate Language, Abusive Behavior, Inappropriate Avatar, Topic Bumping. Are there any other typical bad posts that fall into a category I am missing?

 

2. Each of those categories have default point values from 0-5. What do you think they should be?

 

3. What should happen to a member if they rack up X number of points? (Each time that get a point - the user is warned.) This can range from being able to read and not post to removing all access to the community.

 

4. Should points expire? If so, how long should they remain?

 

5. Should there be an appeals process (post restriction/banning) and what would this look like?

 

This is just feedback. We may disagree on what you say. Your feedback may not be feasible either. regardless, thoughtful replies are appreciated.

 

Thanks.

Just my 2centavos.

 

. We have several default areas of concern: Politics, COVID-19, Inappropriate Language, Abusive Behavior, Inappropriate Avatar, Topic Bumping. Are there any other typical bad posts that fall into a category I am missing? Doxing which can entail exposing personal information and or non twobillsdrive related content to attempt to ridicule, harass or  humiliate members

 

2. Each of those categories have default point values from 0-5. What do you think they should be?  warnings and or minimal points only for first indiscretion and after that they've been warned lower the boom. (suspensions also short to longer to permanent your call)

 

3. What should happen to a member if they rack up X number of points? (Each time that get a point - the user is warned.) This can range from being able to read and not post to removing all access to the community. Have rules stated clearly then people will have no excuse they didn't know whatever ramifications you decide . I think again warnings first, direct to a "code of conduct" and then suspensions if necessary if after 2 warnings they don't get it. Three Strikes yer Out. First a week, then a month, then a year.

 

4. Should points expire? If so, how long should they remain? slate cleared a year from date of issuance

 

5. Should there be an appeals process (post restriction/banning) and what would this look like? If there were no firm rules stated then an appeal process. But once rules decided and after 2 warnings again its on THEM and they should have known better. No excuses no appeals.

 

This is just feedback. We may disagree on what you say. Your feedback may not be feasible either. regardless, thoughtful replies are appreciated.

 

Thanks.

[NoSaint]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

1.) I think it’s hard to regulate the Covid/politics as their is so much crossover right now. The most recent Bills press release is even about it. This should be okay as long as people are respectful. When the topic turns and people cross the line that will fall to the abusive behavior IMO. 
 

2.) Abusive behavior would be 4 points for me. Crusading would be 2 but probably should have some sort of warning first because this can get blurry. What’s a crusade vs. a long discussion on a topic? Thread bumping would be 1. Duplicate threads would be 1 as well. 
 

3.) 8 points result is a month suspension. When you come back 1/2 of those points are pulled. You lose 2 points a month over each of the next 2. That way if you come back from a suspension and are abusive in month 1 you are out again. That’s the most serious offense on here IMO.

 

4.) Points should certainly expire. 2 points a month should come off.

 

5.) Yeah, I think that things can occasionally be blurry. Maybe some sort of “board of members” or mods review it? There would be some criteria for who would be eligible (well behaved and veteran posters). This group would seem to have TBD’s best interest at heart. Maybe like 11 people and 6 votes will overturn it? I think you need a decent sized group in order to be fair. 
 

Just my $.02 and thanks as always @SDS for letting us weigh in.

generally agree On the first 4.
 

politics are in everything. Hard to pretend it’s not. I’d rather focus on tone than content there, right? I think society as a whole would be better if civil discourse was encourage instead of accepting politics as a topic too far to address 

 

The exact value and how quickly they age out and what threshold you get bumped out at I don’t feel like hyper analyzing but something like you laid out seems roughly good.

 

having a review board seems like overkill. Sometimes we may be too serious and overengineer a message board. If a poster feels targeted or misunderstood it seems easy enough to shoot the mod that hit you a note, or another mod a quick ask for help. Won’t be perfect but no answer will be.... so may as well keep it super simple.

Edited September 30, 2020 by NoSaint

[Max Fischer]

6 hours ago, SDS said:

Hey everyone... 3-0!!! How 'bout them Bills??? Let's keep it going.... 👊

 

I'd like to ask for constructive input on community moderation. Our software has a ton of features that we have never used and it may be time to provide some structure. I'm hoping that provides a more methodical and more informed way to keep this train chugging along in a smooth way. FYI, off-topic/"funny"/inappropriate posts will be deleted. Here is what I want to know:

 

1. We have several default areas of concern: Politics, COVID-19, Inappropriate Language, Abusive Behavior, Inappropriate Avatar, Topic Bumping. Are there any other typical bad posts that fall into a category I am missing?

 

2. Each of those categories have default point values from 0-5. What do you think they should be?

 

3. What should happen to a member if they rack up X number of points? (Each time that get a point - the user is warned.) This can range from being able to read and not post to removing all access to the community.

 

4. Should points expire? If so, how long should they remain?

 

5. Should there be an appeals process (post restriction/banning) and what would this look like?

 

This is just feedback. We may disagree on what you say. Your feedback may not be feasible either. regardless, thoughtful replies are appreciated.

 

Thanks.

 

Area of Concern: Crusading/Trolling. Same topic over and over. 

 

 

[Kirby Jackson]

10 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

generally agree On the first 4.
 

politics are in everything. Hard to pretend it’s not. I’d rather focus on tone than content there, right? I think society as a whole would be better if civil discourse was encourage instead of accepting politics as a topic too far to address 

 

The exact value and how quickly they age out and what threshold you get bumped out at I don’t feel like hyper analyzing but something like you laid out seems roughly good.

 

having a review board seems like overkill. Sometimes we may be too serious and overengineer a message board. If a poster feels targeted or misunderstood it seems easy enough to shoot the mod that hit you a note, or another mod a quick ask for help. Won’t be perfect but no answer will be.... so may as well keep it super simple.

My only thought is that we generally do a pretty good job of self-policing. There can be hard feelings I suppose. I really don’t envision some big review. It’s more like “here’s the situation, yay or nay on the suspension?”

[Jay_Fixit]

Please don’t ask @T&C for his input.

[Augie]

There are a lot of good comments here about points, how much each infraction should count by category, if they should roll off, etc. My biggest concern would be the “community moderation” aspect. I trust the Mods to be reasonable adults. You might disagree, but they will not be as petty and nasty as your average (or certainly bottom end) poster. I fear this could fuel a downward spiral in civility as posters start unloading on others they don’t like or disagree with. That is the opposite of what we want, IMO. 

 

I respect everyone here as a person. I do not trust everyone here to regulate the board. The Mods do a great job with what they do. I like a system where posters can report what they find offensive, and Mods get the task of getting to the bottom of things and deciding the proper response. 

 

Just one guy’s opinion. 

 

 

.

Edited September 30, 2020 by Augie

[AmishRifle]

I’m happy with how the board is currently moderated.  I enjoy coming here to exchange ideas and get caught up on news.  Thank you to SDS and the mods for what you do and how you do it.  

[Lfod]

4 hours ago, formerlyofCtown said:

I'm not sure what is meant by off topic post but to me I don't think they should be grouped with off topic behavior.  You would lose a lot of your veteran posters depending on how you define off topic behavior.  You wouldn't want that, after all it's the posters that make the site not the other way around IMO.

 

If someone could clarify what is meant by off topic that could result in suspension or banning.

Another poster brought up the off topic situation and to be honest I don't actually know the span of what that actually covers.

 

I can only clarify that I meant people that steer a conversation into the #1 point of the original post. A forum for every topic exists and people can get into deep discussion in those forums meant to discuss those types of topics. 

 

I should of been more specific because conversations happen between posters that know each other, and a conversation  can go off track and it's not something that I think is an off topic type problem.

 

 I am not bothered by some one bringing up chicken wings, recipes, inside jokes between posters. I'm not talking about bringing the hammer down on somebody telling a story from thier life. I could be wrong but I don't think that was ever a thing that was considered a part of the off topic punishments. I enjoy reading people banter.

 

I was only thinking off topic as hot button subjects that will turn into heated debates and arguments that fill pages that is outside of the realm of football discussion. 

Edited September 30, 2020 by Lfod

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, clayboy54 said:

I do believe that a limit to new topics would be nice, because it can get ridiculous to have so many posts that have no merit.

 

We try.  We merge topics (or sometimes lock) duplicative topics.  It gets tricky sometimes - if topics seem similar but have a different POV, if there are duplicate threads but they both have good conversations going by the time we catch them.

 

One thing that I believe has helped is to limit the ability of new posters to start threads.  It has cut down a TON of unsubstantive duplicate topics IMHO.

 

What do you have in mind or what would you like to see on the subject?

[bobobonators]

8 hours ago, SDS said:

Hey everyone... 3-0!!! How 'bout them Bills??? Let's keep it going.... 👊

 

I'd like to ask for constructive input on community moderation. Our software has a ton of features that we have never used and it may be time to provide some structure. I'm hoping that provides a more methodical and more informed way to keep this train chugging along in a smooth way. FYI, off-topic/"funny"/inappropriate posts will be deleted. Here is what I want to know:

 

1. We have several default areas of concern: Politics, COVID-19, Inappropriate Language, Abusive Behavior, Inappropriate Avatar, Topic Bumping. Are there any other typical bad posts that fall into a category I am missing?

 

2. Each of those categories have default point values from 0-5. What do you think they should be?

 

3. What should happen to a member if they rack up X number of points? (Each time that get a point - the user is warned.) This can range from being able to read and not post to removing all access to the community.

 

4. Should points expire? If so, how long should they remain?

 

5. Should there be an appeals process (post restriction/banning) and what would this look like?

 

This is just feedback. We may disagree on what you say. Your feedback may not be feasible either. regardless, thoughtful replies are appreciated.

 

Thanks.

i have 2 Points from 2014 which were given to me by the great Beerball. I would like to contest those and have them expunged. 2014 Bobo is not 2020 Bobo 😊

[Paulus]

8 hours ago, SDS said:

Hey everyone... 3-0!!! How 'bout them Bills??? Let's keep it going.... 👊

 

I'd like to ask for constructive input on community moderation. Our software has a ton of features that we have never used and it may be time to provide some structure. I'm hoping that provides a more methodical and more informed way to keep this train chugging along in a smooth way. FYI, off-topic/"funny"/inappropriate posts will be deleted. Here is what I want to know:

 

1. We have several default areas of concern: Politics, COVID-19, Inappropriate Language, Abusive Behavior, Inappropriate Avatar, Topic Bumping. Are there any other typical bad posts that fall into a category I am missing?

 

2. Each of those categories have default point values from 0-5. What do you think they should be?

 

3. What should happen to a member if they rack up X number of points? (Each time that get a point - the user is warned.) This can range from being able to read and not post to removing all access to the community.

 

4. Should points expire? If so, how long should they remain?

 

5. Should there be an appeals process (post restriction/banning) and what would this look like?

 

This is just feedback. We may disagree on what you say. Your feedback may not be feasible either. regardless, thoughtful replies are appreciated.

 

Thanks.

Whatever you do, I think allowing points to expire would be pragmatic (at least initially).

[NoSaint]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

My only thought is that we generally do a pretty good job of self-policing. There can be hard feelings I suppose. I really don’t envision some big review. It’s more like “here’s the situation, yay or nay on the suspension?”

oh I get it- I just think you are fine with a second set of mod eyes or just SDS. I wouldn’t be upset if it went your way, just felt like more than needed since it’s a pretty low key spot that does generally run so smoothly. 

[TwistofFate]

I think a point system should be 1-3 points per infraction depending on severity. 

 

5 points - warning about conduct. 

 

7 points - suspension of post privileges for a week with the ability to log in and ready only. 

 

10 points - 1 month ban

 

13 points - permaban

 

Points should roll off at a rate of 1 per month. At that rate, a severe infraction would take 3 months to fully recover from. 

 

For the most part, all of us being fans (fanatics), arguments and opinions get heated and intense.  I don't think most on here troll or attempt to get a rise, we just have strong beliefs. 

 

Mistakes are made sometimes and with a roll off point system it will allow that mistake to erase after time and return to a good standing. 

 

An appeals process would be nice depending on how it would work. Bias does exist, especially if you have an unpopular opinion. I guess it all depends on who would review the appeal. 

Edited September 30, 2020 by TwistofFate

[Ethan in Cleveland]

1. IN

2. Geterr done

3. Blaming the refs

 

Block those and the board will be a better place

[BringBackFergy]

This is a great board. Well run, interesting and enjoyable. 
 

Food for thought, since @SDS has never asked us for $$ to be a member here, maybe there’s some way to impose a fine/surcharge structure to a charitable cause.

For example, let’s say I get banned for 30 days (pick an infraction, this is hypothetical), what if I was given the option to shorten my ban by donating $25 to the American Cancer Society or Humane Society? Or if I have 9 points and want to expunge 6 of them, I could donate $25 to the above charity. I would make the donation and email the “Thank you for your donation” notice from the charity to a mod so they could make the necessary change to my account status. 

 

Again, this isn’t really a “fine” per se - it’s more of an optional redemption device. And the charities would have to be acceptable (American Cancer Society, St Jude’s, Humane Society, etc) as opposed to “Gugny’s Spring Break Fund 2021”. 
 

Sometimes the most effective way to change people’s behavior is to add a monetary incentive. If that monetary donation can affect change in both the poster who donates and a charitable cause, it’s a win-win. 

Go Bills!

[Chandler#81]

@BringBackFergy the Chandler#81 Homeless charity is taking donations. Thank you!

jk. 

 

How ‘bout not making posts worthy of

 

[SydneyBillsFan]

There should be zero tolerance for personal insults and bad language.

 

Everything else should open slather.

[Golden Goat]

15 hours ago, Bill Lewes said:

Abusive Behavior -5 (it ought to be obvious that you can disagree with an idea, without calling the idea-giver an idiot),

 

Some people get away with this (repeatedly) because they're "grandfathered in." I've always found that to be horse****. If it doesn't apply for all, it shouldn't apply for any.

[BobbyC81]

17 hours ago, Fan in Chicago said:

1. Add "crusades"

2. Points should be based on severity of impact to the community. (More severe, more points).

    Politics, COVID-19=1

    Topic bumping =2

     Inappropriate avatar = 3

     Inapp Language = 4

     Abusive behavior = 5 

 

3. 10 points = post only

     15 points = vacation

     25+ points = 1 year ban

      Do we need a permanent ban ?

 

4. Need some kind of probation system. As an example, if someone gets a vacation and "earns" a certain number of points in a defined period of time, he automatically gets the next level of punishment

as an example, if someone comes back from vacation and gets another 10 points within a month, he gets a 1 year ban

 

5. Appeals should apply to bans only else it will be too much work for the mods.

 

 

If they appeal, can they still participate until their appeal is heard?

[4merper4mer]

18 hours ago, SDS said:

Hey everyone... 3-0!!! How 'bout them Bills??? Let's keep it going.... 👊

 

I'd like to ask for constructive input on community moderation. Our software has a ton of features that we have never used and it may be time to provide some structure. I'm hoping that provides a more methodical and more informed way to keep this train chugging along in a smooth way. FYI, off-topic/"funny"/inappropriate posts will be deleted. Here is what I want to know:

 

1. We have several default areas of concern: Politics, COVID-19, Inappropriate Language, Abusive Behavior, Inappropriate Avatar, Topic Bumping. Are there any other typical bad posts that fall into a category I am missing?

 

2. Each of those categories have default point values from 0-5. What do you think they should be?

 

3. What should happen to a member if they rack up X number of points? (Each time that get a point - the user is warned.) This can range from being able to read and not post to removing all access to the community.

 

4. Should points expire? If so, how long should they remain?

 

5. Should there be an appeals process (post restriction/banning) and what would this look like?

 

This is just feedback. We may disagree on what you say. Your feedback may not be feasible either. regardless, thoughtful replies are appreciated.

 

Thanks.

1.  Add "crusades" to the list.

2. Whatever 5 is should be very hard to get, and carry some sort of immediate suspension.  Only personal attacks/threats?

3.  This is the hardest part.  If 1 is an off color joke or something very borderline and 5 is a threat, do 5 1's really equal 5?  I see no reason why someone banned or suspended wouldn't be able to view the site.  What's the harm there?

4. Yes.  Not sure I have a perfect formula but 1's should expire more quickly than 2's and so on.

5.  Probably yes but probably hard to manage.  Maybe one mod can be assigned for an impartial review of every suspension.  That mod could decide whether or not to contact the offender.

Edited September 30, 2020 by 4merper4mer

[Hapless Bills Fan]

18 hours ago, SDS said:

Hey everyone... 3-0!!! How 'bout them Bills??? Let's keep it going.... 👊

 

I'd like to ask for constructive input on community moderation. Our software has a ton of features that we have never used and it may be time to provide some structure. I'm hoping that provides a more methodical and more informed way to keep this train chugging along in a smooth way. FYI, off-topic/"funny"/inappropriate posts will be deleted. Here is what I want to know:

 

1. We have several default areas of concern: Politics, COVID-19, Inappropriate Language, Abusive Behavior, Inappropriate Avatar, Topic Bumping. Are there any other typical bad posts that fall into a category I am missing?

 

2. Each of those categories have default point values from 0-5. What do you think they should be?

 

3. What should happen to a member if they rack up X number of points? (Each time that get a point - the user is warned.) This can range from being able to read and not post to removing all access to the community.

 

4. Should points expire? If so, how long should they remain?

 

5. Should there be an appeals process (post restriction/banning) and what would this look like?

 

This is just feedback. We may disagree on what you say. Your feedback may not be feasible either. regardless, thoughtful replies are appreciated.

 

Thanks.

 

@SDS for areas of concern, what about "shadow mod-ing", which you've previously called out on the board as un-constructive (albeit sometimes well intended).

 

Also should there be a breakout category of "abusive behavior" for the more severe categories - actual threats of violence or wishes for bodily harm or actual defamation?