As the message board charter states we get feedback on major decisions and the only reason to ban people is to 'protect' other forum members, it only makes sense that we get feedback from ‘forum members’ before implementing definitive process for suspensions and bandings.

In the beginning, decisions to ban went before the advisory board. Since the board was disbanded, I have made all final decisions on whether to suspend, typically after a request by one or more moderators to do so. There have been a couple situations where mods have banned a member based on what they considered an emergency situation (they have the power to do that, with procedural limits, although it is a bit ambiguous).

We need to formalize a policy for when a member should be banned. I am going to throw out some ideas/possibilities, but we can and should add to the list of possibilities based on discussion (and ideas that are presented) in this thread.

For the purposes of full disclosure, I need to make the following point. First, I want to say that IMO, we have a great set of mods that are doing a great job of balancing a need to keep Broncosforums friendly and fun with the need to prevent people from running wild attacking other members. Having said that, if I was not currently a built in ‘slow down’ in terms of approving suspensions/bans, we would have had quite a few more bans to date. Meaning, that based on moderator discussion on problems that have arisen, it is clear that I am much more reticent to suspend/ban than the mods in general. This is probably do to the fact that they have to deal with the crap on a regular basis, which often includes people not complying with their directive to discontinue certain behavior. So, if I am simply removed from the picture and each mod can made the decision to ban/suspend on a case by case basis, I am confident that the number of suspensions will increase fairly rapidly. That might be a good thing, as I tend to give people 2nd, 3rd and even 4th chances before implementing a suspension.

I bring up the above, because most message boards either allow mods to make judgement calls on suspensions/bannings (often with limited to no appeal process) or use an Infractions Points system to attempt to eliminate “heat of the moment bannings” and to allow members to know when they are pushing the envelope and getting close to being suspended. I don’t want to continue being the person making the final call on suspensions/bannings for a number of reasons, including that with work I travel overseas several times a year and have limited time to check in. In addition, I just don’t particularly like being in that position, for the same reason I don’t want to moderate the message board.

Here are four initial options for us to consider, plus as I said we will update this list as ideas are presented in this discussion:

  • Individual mods have freedom to suspend/ban at their discretion (possibly with guidelines for x number of warnings before suspending)
  • X number of mods (three for instance) must agree on a suspension/banning (possibly with guidelines for x number of warnings before suspending)
  • A group of forum members (jury if you will) that have been pre-selected in some manner, will be presented with all non-emergency banning situations and 'based on the forum rules' determine whether and suspension/banning is in order and for how long (possibly with guidelines for x number of warnings before suspending). For this to work, the group would have to be preselected and large enough to ensure that when they were presented with a situation, enough of them would respond with a vote of yes/no on the suspension within x hours (12 or 24), so that a reasonably quick resolution could be arrived at.
  • An infraction system like Broncos Country uses and Broncosfreak used to use, in which thresholds (when suspensions will occur) are clearly publicized, as well as the values for each and all infractions. This is built in to vBulletin, and thousands of message boards use. When implemented correctly, it is probably the closest manner of taking emotion out of the banning process and at the same time creating both a system of warning people when they are getting close, but also quickly taking action.


Of the options above, I know the last one will be met with immediate resistance by many that came from Mania. To that, let me say this. Many, many message boards (probably thousands) use an infractions points system without the problems that occurred on mania. A lot of that had to do with the way it was implemented. First, they refused to publicize the values for each infraction type as well as what the levels were for suspensions (or other loss of privileges). Second, one of the mods started giving out infractions before the IP system was publically announced. Third, borderline IPs were given, such as the famous “Frog” IPs.

Anyway, we need to discuss this and define how suspensions and bannings should be handed out. Unfortunately, it is a fact of life that not all members will be so well behaved that we don’t have to worry about suspending/banning people. Instead, a great many people tend to push and push until it is clear to them that if they push anymore, they will be banned/suspended. Then, they often chill out for a little while.

Right now our mods are in a tough position, because we do not have a defined policy for how and when members will be suspended/banned and therefore members push the envelope more than they should and take advantage of the non-defined suspension process.

Let’s try to keep this discussion on topic and not take shots at each other for their opinions. If for any reason anyone is uncomfortable posting their opinion openly, then PM me and I will repost it in this thread anonymously.

Thanks
T