Thread: Town Hall Proposal: Implementation of an infraction points (IP) system

Ok, we have a problem. We have some people following the rules, some people not. The people that don't follow the rules often don't have any one rules violation that warrants a suspension/ban from the forum or an opt-in group. However, in many cases cumulatively their actions/violations warrant a suspension or loss of opt-in privileges.

Much of the feedback we receive is that the repeat offenders keep getting away with attacks and other rules violations. However, we have no good way to monitor and issue suspensions and opt-in bans, because it is all too arbitrary right now.

Now that the mods are in charge of suspensions, we have and are talking about things, such as three strike policies, but what constitutes a strike?

Should all of the following 'equally' count as a strike:

• Someone typing f'k and circumventing the language filter
• Someone typing "geez, apparently you don't know how to read"
• Someone typing "you are a worthless piece of shit, and I hope you die a slow, painful death"

All of those are rules violations, but should they equally count as a 'strike' in something like a three strike policy?

Hence the dilemma. I have been roundly criticized for being to lenient and not banning people who deserve to be banned, but it is very difficult to make arbitrary decisions on rules violations of varying degrees that occur over extended periods of time. Add to that the fact that we all have 'bias' (thanks Buff for reminding us ), so human nature is to give a 'pass' to someone you think is typically a good poster that got caught up in the moment, vs. someone you think is a 'trouble maker'. However, how many times should a 'good poster' get a pass, before s/he is moved to 'trouble maker' status?

These are just 'some' of the factors that people don't see on a regular basis, which makes it hard for me personally to pull the trigger on a ban, and tend to give people second and third chances.

Now, as the banning is being turned over to the mods, we are discussing exactly what criteria should be used, and once again we find ourselves with the same old question, are all violations equal. I don't think so, which makes an x strike policy very difficult. It makes getting it "right" with arbitrary and subjective bannings virtually impossible.

So, while it may be very unpopular with those of us that came from Mania, I am proposing that we institute an infractions points (IP) system, similar to that which existed on Broncosfreak and similar to what Mania has. More important, it is similar to what works VERY well on thousands of other message boards. It is a built in and commonly used feature on vBulletin boards.

For those that came over from Mania, please have an open mind and read on, because this can enable us to remove the subjectiveness (and even bias, Buff ) from the process of deciding when someone needs to be banned/suspended.

I will describe conceptually how the system would work, but this is just a concept, meaning we haven't gone through and defined every infraction, length of time, etc. That would come after we decide to go through with this, depending on the feedback we receive.

So, the concept is that any post that violates a rule, will result in a mod issuing an infraction. There will be multiple infractions, such as:

• Circumventing language filter outside the lounge
• Personal attack - minor
• Personal attack - major
• Defying a mods directive
• Racist remark/gender harrasment
• Sig/avvie violation
• Posting nudity/inappropriate graphic

Each one of the above would be assigned a point values and expirations, maybe like:

• 1 pt - 7 days - Circumventing language filter outside the lounge
• 5 pt - 14 days - Personal attack - minor
• 15 pt - 30 days - Personal attack - major
• 10 pt - 14 days - Defying a mods directive
• 10 pt - 30 days - Racist remark/gender harrasment
• 5 pt - 14 days - Sig/avvie violation
• 15 pt - 14 days - Posting nudity/inappropriate graphic

Then, there are thresholds where privelages are lost, lets keep it simple and just have three groups for this example:

Less than 20 points, full privelages
Between 21 points and 30 points, loss of opt-in privelages
Over 30 points, full suspension from message board.

Since each individual infraction would have it's own expiration, bans woud be issued and removed automatically as infractions expire.

Lets say I get
11/1 Major personal attack - 15 points - 30 days
11/7 Defying moderator - 10 points - 14 days

At this point, I lose my access to the opt-in forums (25 points).

On 11/14 Major Personal attack 15 points - 30 days

Now, I get a full message board suspension (40 points).

On 11/21 the Defying moderator infraction expires
Now, my full suspension ends, but I still don't have access to opt-in forums, because I still have 30 points.

On 12/1 the first Major personal attack expires, which drops my total points to 15, which means I get full access to the message board back.


So, in summary, that is how it would work. There are other nuances, such as a mod would have the option to issue a 0 point warning infraction on some of the minor ones, such as circumventing the filter, or minor attack, so we could alert the poster that they are doing something wrong and track it, but if it is a first offense, not have any points accumulate.

For all the people that have been complaining that we have been too lenient, or that we are not 'fair' in how people are suspended, this system is the ONLY way to apply suspensions/punishment evenly across the board.

While I believe strongly this type of system is what we need to move to, the fact that many on Mania had a bad experience with it, I want to have an open discussion about the pros and cons before any decision is made.

Please give input here.

P.S: There is also a selfish reason for moving in this direction. Up to this point, I have made all ban decisions, and I take making those decisions very serious, giving multiple warnings and being 'sure' someone needs to be banned.

I need to cease to have such a hands on involvement, and want to move more into a role where I can actually start posting again, act as oversite for moderator's actions, deal with poster appeals on bans or other actions, and then do the technical admin roles. I need a break from the day to day operations of the board -- I really need a break. I need to either be able to post again, rather than dealing with crap all day long, or walk away from the board for stretches, knowing that there is a system in place where the mods can keep things running like clockwork, and deal with problem posters.

EDIT: I was asked to produce a screen shot of what it would look like. This shows a couple infractions I received on mania, so it gives you an idea of how it will look when you go to your User CP:

I'm gonna have to read this in the morning... (too many)

After a brief scan, I like what I think you're getting at.

*shrugs*


i really have no problem with it, as long as the mods don't start issuing infractions all over the place for piddly transgressions, which i don't really see happening. . .




i think the wisest course of action is to test the system out by banning mtnman and WTM-- they've got the most experience with being banned, they should be able to tell us how effective it is. . . .

Originally Posted by shamed fan

*shrugs*


i really have no problem with it, as long as the mods don't start issuing infractions all over the place for piddly transgressions, which i don't really see happening. . .




i think the wisest course of action is to test the system out by banning mtnman and WTM-- they've got the most experience with being banned, they should be able to tell us how effective it is. . . .

I know your joking around and what not but for we would like everyone to try and take this serious as we (as a board) really need to come to a conclusion on the best way to fix the problems that we are having on here. And i know there will be some who will go with the he said/she said arguements but it just isnt that simple. So this proposal is put up here to try and make sure that everything is run sharper and without any chance of bias. People will be accountable for their own actions from here on out which is the way it should be. Everyone will be accountable for their own behavior no matter what race, sex, or political affliation. So i suggest people look at this seriously. Not picking on you, but i just dont want the thread to get hijacked like most of them do.

P.S: I will also add this to the bottom of my initial post. There is also a selfish reason for moving in this direction. Up to this point, I have made all ban decisions, and I take making those decisions very serious, giving multiple warnings and being 'sure' someone needs to be banned.

I need to cease to have such a hands on involvement, and want to move more into a role where I can actually start posting again, act as oversite for moderator's actions, deal with poster appeals on bans or other actions, and then do the technical admin roles. I need a break from the day to day operations of the board -- I really need a break. I need to either be able to post again, rather than dealing with crap all day long, or walk away from the board for stretches, knowing that there is a system in place where the mods can keep things running like clockwork, and deal with problem posters.

Originally Posted by Tned

P.S: I will also add this to the bottom of my initial post. There is also a selfish reason for moving in this direction. Up to this point, I have made all ban decisions, and I take making those decisions very serious, giving multiple warnings and being 'sure' someone needs to be banned.

I need to cease to have such a hands on involvement, and want to move more into a role where I can actually start posting again, act as oversite for moderator's actions, deal with poster appeals on bans or other actions, and then do the technical admin roles. I need a break from the day to day operations of the board -- I really need a break. I need to either be able to post again, rather than dealing with crap all day long, or walk away from the board for stretches, knowing that there is a system in place where the mods can keep things running like clockwork, and deal with problem posters.

if that's the case, be like nike and just do it. . . .

i think about 90% of the reason that it bothered people so much on mania was because it came out of the blue with no announcement or warning whatsoever, and right on the heels of the color change fiasco. . . . it really never bothered me all that much, but i guess some people just felt that it was authoritarian the way they just started handing them out with no prior explanation. . . and the whole thing got blown out of shape because a few popular posters got infractions and raised a big stink about it. . .

there's no danger of that happening here, as you've been extremely careful to get people's opinions and solicit feedback. . . as long as we have mods that are familiar with the rather, uhhh, "unique" group dynamics here, i really can't see any great problems arising with the system. . . . just as a suggestion, maybe it should be given a trial period the way the high-five and mile high salute functions were? of course, you might have to give more weight to the mods' opinions i that case, as people who received infractions might not be in favor of continuing the system, but i think that if we see people get banned for causing problems, a decent number of people might actually support it. . .

and if you feel like this time you just need to impliment it and be done with it, i really won't have a problem with that either, as long as the forum continues to run smoothly. . .

Someone typing f'k and circumventing the language filter

IMO, this example seems a tiny bit strict as far as the interpretation of "circumventing the language filter"... if one was to type "fuuck" or "fu ck" or other means that display the actual profanity, then yes...but "f'k" or "f*ck" or "sh*t" are like self-censorship on the part of the poster... similar to "azz" or "a$$" instead of the less-acceptable word for donkey. I mean, how is "****" different from "sh*t"? One still knows what the poster meant in most cases.

Originally Posted by Midnight Blue

IMO, this example seems a tiny bit strict as far as the interpretation of "circumventing the language filter"... if one was to type "fuuck" or "fu ck" or other means that display the actual profanity, then yes...but "f'k" or "f*ck" or "sh*t" are like self-censorship on the part of the poster... similar to "azz" or "a$$" instead of the less-acceptable word for donkey. I mean, how is "****" different from "sh*t"? One still knows what the poster meant in most cases.

I'm with you on this one. I think self censorship actually shows a bit more thought than straight up typing the word with no regard, and then getting it all *********!


I'd like to thank Tned for giving us the opportunity to discuss this as it wasn't don't on the Mania. I think the way it was handled on Mania, and as Anubis said, on top of the colour change, was incredibly rude, and way beyond authoritarian. So thanks again Tned for giving us the chance to give input. I do think that the mods, and you have had to work too hard to police certain people, and if this is the best way to give yourselfs a bit of a break, then so be it.


I was one of the first people given an IP, for calling Frenchy a frog, which I had done from the first time we had a chat, and he even called himself a frog. It was called a racist attack, and even Frenchy complaining about it did no good. Hahahaha, me calling Frenchy a frog is a term of affection!
Anyways, given that I have been abused by people on the Mania for not being american, and not spelling words the American way, I thought the IP was stupid, and I let my feelings be known.

IP system and CP system sounds good to me.

I was one of the first people given an IP, for calling Frenchy a frog, which I had done from the first time we had a chat, and he even called himself a frog. It was called a racist attack, and even Frenchy complaining about it did no good. Hahahaha, me calling Frenchy a frog is a term of affection!
Anyways, given that I have been abused by people on the Mania for not being american, and not spelling words the American way, I thought the IP was stupid, and I let my feelings be known.

Just proof that this will always be a judgement call, and like all judgement calls subject to error Kap. It can be especially tough when you blend members from a variety of environments sorting out which unfamiliar members are actually close friends giving each other a hard time and which are just being jerks.

I don't generally weigh in on this type of thread because I want to get an unvanished feel for what the membership is thinking and don't want to get into trying to sway opinion. That being said, what Tned is trying to do is develop a method to deal with problem posters more decisively, as I think a sizable majority of the members here want to see happen. As things stand now we get caught stuck between two bad models;

A) Arbitrary but very fast action from Mod staff. This will in some cases be correct, but in others be wrong or give full sway to complaints of bias and unfairness - and its against the grain of the original vision for the site as I understand it when Tned and the rest of you guys left Mania.

B) Mods and Admin end up feeling like Medieval philosophers arguing over how many angels God can fit on the head of a pin. With little subjective guidance this can seemingly go on forever, as we try to determine what is the correct action, why, is it fair, consistent, what have you. Contrary to some opinions there is wide divergence of views within Mod staff on how to do this, even if most of us will vote alike in elections

What Tned is proposing is a means to better let us do our job, consistent with the idea of a community by and for the members.

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

Just proof that this will always be a judgement call, and like all judgement calls subject to error Kap. It can be especially tough when you blend members from a variety of environments sorting out which unfamiliar members are actually close friends giving each other a hard time and which are just being jerks.

I don't generally weigh in on this type of thread because I want to get an unvanished feel for what the membership is thinking and don't want to get into trying to sway opinion. That being said, what Tned is trying to do is develop a method to deal with problem posters more decisively, as I think a sizable majority of the members here want to see happen. As things stand now we get caught stuck between two bad models;

A) Arbitrary but very fast action from Mod staff. This will in some cases be correct, but in others be wrong or give full sway to complaints of bias and unfairness - and its against the grain of the original vision for the site as I understand it when Tned and the rest of you guys left Mania.

B) Mods and Admin end up feeling like Medieval philosophers arguing over how many angels God can fit on the head of a pin. With little subjective guidance this can seemingly go on forever, as we try to determine what is the correct action, why, is it fair, consistent, what have you. Contrary to some opinions there is wide divergence of views within Mod staff on how to do this, even if most of us will vote alike in elections

What Tned is proposing is a means to better let us do our job, consistent with the idea of a community by and for the members.

At the time it was foisted on Mania, it pissed me off, but to be fair, it now works quite well.

I am particularly proud of my last IP.

We had a poster on Mania who was a moron of the upper echelon, and I told him so. It felt good, and I knew I would be ip'd, but damn it was worth it. And I scored many a CP for telling it straight!

Originally Posted by Midnight Blue

IMO, this example seems a tiny bit strict as far as the interpretation of "circumventing the language filter"... if one was to type "fuuck" or "fu ck" or other means that display the actual profanity, then yes...but "f'k" or "f*ck" or "sh*t" are like self-censorship on the part of the poster... similar to "azz" or "a$$" instead of the less-acceptable word for donkey. I mean, how is "****" different from "sh*t"? One still knows what the poster meant in most cases.

Originally Posted by Kapaibro

I'm with you on this one. I think self censorship actually shows a bit more thought than straight up typing the word with no regard, and then getting it all *********!

It might be time to revisit that rule (circumvention of language filter) again, as well as possibly some other rules. Last time we had a Town Hall Discussion on it, most people did not want to allow people to circumvent the language filter.

I'll start a seperate discussion on that.

As to the example, instead of F'k, any number of 'mild' rules violations could have been used in place of F'k, the point being that not all rules violations or event 'attacks' are the same, and the infraction points system is one of the main ways to make sure the reaction or punishment fits the crime.

One of the complaints we receive quite often is why hasn't XXXX been banned, he constantly attacks people?

or

How come xxxx was banned but yyyyy wasn't?

The main problem is that often these individuals don't have any single 'attack' or violation that rises to the justification of a suspension, and therefore a mod sends a mention warning the poster to discontinue said behavior. Maybe they do for a few days, or even a week, then they do it again.

When you mix in the factor that these 'little' attacks, happen over a period of time, often are intermixed with retaliation or ganging up by other posters, someone posting something intentionally aimed at baiting, the waters become very muddy, and as a result, people typically don't get banned unless they have a severe rules violation, completely disregard a mod or respond to the mod with profanity.

So, currently it is completely arbitrary and subjective, some posters getting more 'benefit of the doubt' then they deserve, others getting less than they deserve, and based on a lot of feedback we receive, too few people getting suspensions from the message board, or from the politics area.

This system allows for a much more fair means of responding to rules violations, tracking violations, and suspending members (from the entire message board or the politics or lounge forum).

Also, since the mods would hand out individual infractions, which would add up to suspension as points accumulate, I can move into an appeal role. Currently, since I have been the one making the decision on the bans, the appeal process doesn't work very well, and many members don't see me as an appeal route.

Moving to the IP system, if someone feels they were given an infraction they didn't deserve, then they can contact me and appeal it, and then I can review it and reverse/remove that infraction if I agree with the posters appeal.

There bye providing a much more straight forward appeal path for people that feel they have received an infraction that they shouldn't have (Kap's frog comment as an example from the Mania -- people should check out frenchfans sig, by the way).

Originally Posted by Midnight Blue

IMO, this example seems a tiny bit strict as far as the interpretation of "circumventing the language filter"... if one was to type "fuuck" or "fu ck" or other means that display the actual profanity, then yes...but "f'k" or "f*ck" or "sh*t" are like self-censorship on the part of the poster... similar to "azz" or "a$$" instead of the less-acceptable word for donkey. I mean, how is "****" different from "sh*t"? One still knows what the poster meant in most cases.

Originally Posted by Kapaibro

I'm with you on this one. I think self censorship actually shows a bit more thought than straight up typing the word with no regard, and then getting it all *********!

Since it is a good question, and comletely up to how the current makeup of the community feels, I have started a Town Hall Discussion specifically to talk about circumvention of the profanity filter.

Please give input on that here: http://broncosforums.com/forums/show...018#post432018

I would be all for this. I came over from Mania but I never ran into infraction problems over there. I know that I've crossed the line a couple of times and I think that some points especially the warning will be good in keeping this place friendly. I also think that having someone other than Tned doing the banning and having Tned as a legit appeal will be good not just for the people who have to go through it, but also so that the people watching see that everything's handled as fairly as possible.

I'm down with an implementation of an IP system. It sounds like it will make all the mods and Tned's life much easier and since they volunteer their time (and money), I see no reason why this shouldn't be done.