News banning and reputation systems

iBrian

Peace, Love and Unity
Veteran Member
Messages
6,542
Reaction score
30
Points
48
Location
Scotland
Right, I've now set up automated banning and reputation systems in built within the forum software, and will explain below. :)

1. Warnings, bannings, and suspensions


It's been a long problem with CR on how to implement warnings and bannings - I've tried to focus on context, but that context can seem different at different times and to different people.

The result is that where board staff have taken action, this has sometimes seemed arbitrary and inconsistent.

I'd preferred to try and view issues in context, but it's clear this isn't working to everyone's interests, so I've now set up the automated Infractions system in the forum software.

This is intended to work as follows:

- where the offence is one off and seems relatively minor, a public or private warning

- where the offence is significant and/or occurs repeatedly in a single login session, an Infraction may be given

So what's an Infraction? I'll explain how these work below:

1. each Infraction lasts for 20 days, before being automatically cleared

2. once any member reaches 3 live Infractions, they are automatically suspended for 7 days

Note that I reserve the right to ban anyone without notice, but this is almost exclusively reserved for spammers.

Also note that if someone is suspended more than once in a month, I am likely to consider banning them, as there is an obvious problem with their behviour on the forums.

Reasons for an Infraction

I've currently set up the following as reasons for someone to be issued with an infraction:

Spam posting - ads spammed into the forums, even if not of a commercial nature

Personal attacks - repeated use of personal attacks in posts

Flooding board - setting up numerous threads in a session aimed at promoting a concept/website/product

Inappropriate language - we allow adult subjects to be discussed, but repeated use of outright f*cking obscenities is not good for other users.

Disruptive behaviour - this is posting behaviour intended to overtly attack groups of members by their beliefs, such as blatant attacks on another religion, or even attacks on moderators and the boards where it has been made plain any behaviour is unacceptable

Inappropriate content - we don't want to see graphic images of a sexual, violent, or even medical nature on here.


2. Reputation

Okay, so the moderators have a new tool to implement a warning process.

But what about everybody else?

Sure, IO can't run on strictly democratic principles - some people may want to run the place their way, but have no interest in shouldering the site costs or responsibilities. But everyone should have a voice, right?

Aside from normal feedback mechanisms - ie, PM me with complaints - you can also make you feelings known by using the inbuilt Reputation system.

In the bottom left of each post, under the username, there is now a Thumbs Up/Down icon.

Click on this to assert whether you found this member's contribution in this post to be particularly good or bad.

This will automatically give reputation anonymously, unless you leave a message in the feedback to the user stating who you are.

There are limits, though:

1. you have to give reputation to 15 people before giving it again to the same person. This stops someone abusing the system to give/take reputation to/from the same person.

2. You can only give reputation 10 times in any login session.

The following influences a person's reputation power:

1. How long they have been a member
2. Their post count
3. Their existing reputation

Additionally, members cannot use the reputation unless they:

1. Have more than 50 posts
2. Have more than 10 reputation (ie, the starting figure all new members have)

(Just to note - anyone found gaming the reputation system will have their reputation reset completely.)


All in all these changes should make the IO forums easier, more transparent and accountable than previously - moderators will have clear guidelines to work with, and everyone will be automatically notified of any infractions against them.

In addition, through the Reputation system every member will be able to show their feelings with regards to the consutrctive role - or not - of specific members.

Anyway, hope that helps - any questions, please do feel free to ask. :)
 
Hi Brian. It seems that the reputation point system is set up in such a way that we can only recommend our own posts, not other peoples' posts. :eek: {Unless I'm missing something.}
i.e, the icon only shows up on your own posts. {At least that's how it is for me. :eek:}
 
Oops - updated. :)

Also, to note:

1. When you "give" reputation you take nothing from your own - what happens if effectively your reputation awards are given a certain value based on your existing standing in the community, and it is simply this which is communicated;

2. The green boxes under your username are your current reputation value (sorry, no figures - just an increasing row of green boxes.

Hope that helps. :)
 
Kewl. :cool:

Will there be a FAQ link for those who aren't familiar with vBoard?
Here's a handy link:
vBulletin FAQ

{I'm sorry if it seems like I'm nit-picking. I'm looking for glitches so they can be ironed out before they become a big problem.}

So far, the site seems relatively glitch-free! :)
 
If I see the ability to turn it off, I'll disable that ability - unless the "reputation"
proves a failure, in which case, I'll turn it off altogether.

There have been repeated calls for accountability in the forums, so this is one way in which we can do that, as individuals within the community.
 
If I see the ability to turn it off, I'll disable that ability - unless the "reputation"
proves a failure, in which case, I'll turn it off altogether.

There have been repeated calls for accountability in the forums, so this is one way in which we can do that, as individuals within the community.


So you're saying you have made it so no one can turn off the reputation??

I think you best amend you FAQ on reputation then as this following statement is false...

----------------------------------------------
What if I don't want anyone to see my reputation?
You can disable the display of your reputation by going to your User CP and selecting Edit Options. On this page you will find a check box labelled 'Show Your Reputation Level'. Un-checking this box will remove the display of your reputation and replace it with the Reputation Disabled icon. You can still give and receive reputation while your reputation display is disabled.
---------------------------------------------
 
Apologies for that - the FAQ is a standard text with the forum software - it should have the addendum "Unless the forum administrators have disabled this feature".

Of course, if the Reputation system proves unpopular then I'm happy to turn it off in general. I figure it would be worth trying out as a feedback mechanism overall.
 
I have received some negative reps, however they seem to be anonymous so I cant tell who they are from ?


are they supposed to be anonymous ?
 
I don't believe it is possible to receive negative rep anonymously - I tried it on another member and even I couldn't do that without a posting a message! Can't find any record of your reputation so far, but will keep an eye out - always possible there are bugs in the system.
 
ohhhhhh you have a bad rep. lol. sorry, but thats funny to me. lol. ill give you a good one, gtg.

The accuracy of the reputation system will be amazing huh...

It's going to end up being an eye for an eye with reputation... And friends conteracting reputations... Meaning.. I have doubts in it.
 
The accuracy of the reputation system will be amazing huh...

It's going to end up being an eye for an eye with reputation... And friends conteracting reputations... Meaning.. I have doubts in it.

The reputation system is pretty much ignored over on another board I help moderate, so you never know.
 
Yeah I've been to a couple boards that have rep and nobody takes it seriously there.
 
Well as one who questions the sufficiency of secularism to sustain a free society and rather insists on the importance of grace to collectively sustain it, my bad reputation is assured. :)

Hmmm....yet Simone Weil had a bad reputation:

From the Director of Career Placement, Ecole Normale Supérieure

"We shall send the Red Virgin as far away as possible so that we shall never hear of her again"

The Police Commissioner of Le Puy to the Prefect in a 1932 report to the Prefect:

In the interest of public security it would be advisable that this person be distanced from Le Puy, where she has never ceased to preach revolt.

Now I wonder if my reputation is bad enough. :)
 
Back
Top