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.
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.
