ANNOUNCEMENT: New Infractions & Warning System

[Glass*Soul]

Is it only possible to get one point for one post?

A post in violation could generate 2 points, if there were 2 egregious rule violations. It should be rare.

Or is it possible for several mods to work together "at their discretion" to get a poster banned in one or two posts?

Yes, it is possible... it should be very more rare than a post which earns 2 infraction points. Remember, the RT has staff oversight, and admins will be keeping much closer watch than ever before.

8 points are needed for a perma ban.

Points expire 6 months after they are issued. So, once could earn 3 points in the first 3 months, and then in month 9, they would expire and no longer count towards a perman ban.

Am I right that this is entirely at staff discretion -- that staff may, if they feel moved to do so, perma-ban an ongoing member of long standing without having informed them of a single infraction? Can such a thing happen?

IOW can all of the "steps between" that we have been assured stand between a first infraction and a perma-ban, and (one would assume) even more easily so, the "steps between" that we have been assured stand between a one-month ban and a perma-ban, be disposed of entirely at the whim of staff?

Is the Reconciliation Team automatically informed by staff that such a step has been taken against a member so that they can look into it, and will the member in question be kept abreast of their findings in the case?

I got an idea

Just play by the rules and it won't matter what system they use!!

I think we need to find out what the rules really are before we start hand-clapping at the idea of playing by them. If one of the rules is that the rules are changeble, then staff are the only ones who have the power to "play." Our only role becomes that of being acted upon by them.

Here's a good question. If staff should ever come to me asking me for the CF equivalent of my coat, what would be the CF equivalent of giving them my cloak as well?

 

[CaDan]

*checking in*

 

[Gardener101]

I think we need to find out what the rules really are before we start hand-clapping at the idea of playing by them. If one of the rules is that the rules are changeble, then staff are the only ones who have the power to "play." Our only role becomes that of being acted upon by them.

Here's a good question. If staff should ever come to me asking me for the CF equivalent of my coat, what would be the CF equivalent of giving them my cloak as well?

 

[chaoschristian]

Beast, I am humbled by your eloquence.

I thought it might be a good idea to review our situation lest we lose sight of it in the many announcement threads it involves.

• Staff have been given great latitude in applying the rules.
• Staff discussions are hidden.
• The report process is hidden from all but staff and the member involved.
• The appeals process, including any work done by the Reconciliation Team, is hidden.
• We are forbidden to communicate what has happened in these processes to one another by posting the information publicly or PMing it to one another.
• We may not approach LeeD concerning these processes.
• Four infractions in a six month period result in a one month ban and four more result in a perma-ban.
• In the two areas in which we may discuss policy openly with staff, the staff reply only every few days or even weeks to active threads.

Am I missing anything important?

The summation of an effective monetization.

 

[Gardener101]

• The report process is hidden from all but staff and the member involved.

Am I missing anything important?

This too has recently changed, has it not?

I was able to read a report thread about me, but now I no longer have access to any report threads about me.

Instead, it's the person who reported me that is given access to the thread.

This is an unfair system. Why can't the reporter and the reported both have access? Mods, can someone please tell me?

I can't keep up with all the announcement threads. Thank you.

 

[mnphysicist]

Am I right that this is entirely at staff discretion -- that staff may, if they feel moved to do so, perma-ban an ongoing member of long standing without having informed them of a single infraction? Can such a thing happen?

There are provisions for banning members with significant post counts, without prior infractions. This should be exceedingly rare.

IOW can all of the "steps between" that we have been assured stand between a first infraction and a perma-ban, and (one would assume) even more easily so, the "steps between" that we have been assured stand between a one-month ban and a perma-ban, be disposed of entirely at the whim of staff?

To bypass the "steps between" is a pretty serious matter, so I wouldn't call it a whim, but yes, it is possible.

Is the Reconciliation Team automatically informed by staff that such a step has been taken against a member so that they can look into it, and will the member in question be kept abreast of their findings in the case?

The RT as well as the CEO and his advisors are made aware of such issues. This should be published somewhere.... If its not, it will be published in the next 30 days or so. Policy has a large backlog.

I think we need to find out what the rules really are before we start hand-clapping at the idea of playing by them. If one of the rules is that the rules are changeble, then staff are the only ones who have the power to "play." Our only role becomes that of being acted upon by them.

We need to get more information out in the public areas, and we need the faq updated. Otherwise, its a really loosing deal for members, as they won't know, until they run into a violation, and even then may not have all the info.

Here's a good question. If staff should ever come to me asking me for the CF equivalent of my coat, what would be the CF equivalent of giving them my cloak as well?

That is a good question.... I would like to think it won't happen, and if it did, the RT would make it right. We may well need process documents to prevent it from occurring.

 

[mnphysicist]

This too has recently changed, has it not?

I was able to read a report thread about me, but now I no longer have access to any report threads about me.

Instead, it's the person who reported me that is given access to the thread.

Thats a software bug, and Lee's guys are working on it.

This is an unfair system. Why can't the reporter and the reported both have access? Mods, can someone please tell me?

With the bug, it sure is, as it unbalances the communications ability of the reported member.

 

[Gardener101]

[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]Thats a software bug, and Lee's guys are working on it.


With the bug, it sure is, as it unbalances the communications ability of the reported member.

Thank you. I hope it gets resolved soon.

 

[sk8Joyful]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glass*Soul
Am I right that this is entirely at staff discretion -- that staff may, if they feel moved to do so, perma-ban an ongoing member of long standing without having informed them of a single infraction? Can such a thing happen?
[/quote]

There are provisions for banning members with significant post counts, without prior infractions. This should be exceedingly rare.

Specific reasons for doing so would be

To bypass the "steps between" is a pretty serious matter, so I wouldn't call it a whim, but yes, it is possible.

The RT as well as the CEO and his advisors are made aware of such issues. This should be published somewhere.... If its not, it will be published in the next 30 days or so. Policy has a large backlog.

We need to get more information out in the public areas, and we need the faq updated. Otherwise, its a really loosing deal for members, as they won't know, until they run into a violation, and even then may not have all the info.

That is a good question.... I would like to think it won't happen, and if it did, the RT would make it right. We may well need process documents to prevent it from occurring.

 

[Floatingaxe]

With the bug, it sure is, as it unbalances the communications ability of the reported member.

You're tellin' me...

 

[No Swansong]

I got an idea

Just play by the rules and it won't matter what system they use!!

Well actully that's not true. That is the problem as many have pointed out.

 

[Latreia]

This too has recently changed, has it not?

I was able to read a report thread about me, but now I no longer have access to any report threads about me.

Instead, it's the person who reported me that is given access to the thread.

This is an unfair system. Why can't the reporter and the reported both have access? Mods, can someone please tell me?

I can't keep up with all the announcement threads. Thank you.

[/color][/size][/font]Thats a software bug, and Lee's guys are working on it.


With the bug, it sure is, as it unbalances the communications ability of the reported member.

If this be a bug, it is serious enough for members whose posts have been reported not to be left out of staff comments in their reports threads.

There should be a hold put on determining the actions on those reports until members at last have access after the bug is fixed.

Otherwise, this is sheer chaos for both staff and members, as both are in the dark about the right things to do.



That's why I have said that reports are like dandruff, they cause staff a lot of head-scratching and there is also a lot of fall-out involved!!!

 

[Glass*Soul]

There are provisions for banning members with significant post counts, without prior infractions. This should be exceedingly rare.

To bypass the "steps between" is a pretty serious matter, so I wouldn't call it a whim, but yes, it is possible.

The RT as well as the CEO and his advisors are made aware of such issues. This should be published somewhere.... If its not, it will be published in the next 30 days or so. Policy has a large backlog.

Will it be published where the general membership can see it?

Once the RT is made aware of a member having being summarily perma-banned and begins investigating the circumstances, is there a process in place to keep the banned member abreast of their findings?

We need to get more information out in the public areas, and we need the faq updated. Otherwise, its a really loosing deal for members, as they won't know, until they run into a violation, and even then may not have all the info.

And if a member's first notification of a violation is a perma-ban, it's all the more a losing deal.

That is a good question.... I would like to think it won't happen, and if it did, the RT would make it right. We may well need process documents to prevent it from occurring.

How will process documents keep it from happening?

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

Seriously. Process documentation doesn't hold up well against the weight of universal "Staff discretion".

 

[ForHisGlory]

It's nice to see CF returning to CF

 

[Gwenyfur]

There's usually 3 sides to everyone story...that side, that side adn the truth...

 

[No Swansong]

That may be true my friend however it doesn't answer any of the questions in the thread.

When I saw that staff had responded I actually got excited hoping that some concerns would be addressed. I must ask are you staff under some kind of gag order or something?

 

[brachah]

It seems alot depends on the mods using their discretions fairly.

And secrete proceedings??? Are we under canon law again?

 

[brachah]

It's nice to see CF returning to CF

hope return to good things only.

 

[Floatingaxe]

Sheeesh! Recently we were allowed access to some of our reports. Now there seems to be NO access to any!

This is ridiculous! There are posters who just love to report me for sport it seems. I need to be able to access those threads. I also want to know what is happening with the reports I make.

I believe there is great potential for bias and inequitable treatment with the closed reporting system. I am not a happy camper.