Announcing the new Warning and Infraction system effective immediately

[pdudgeon]

But isn't taking the counseling PM's off a bad thing?

Wouldn't you rather get a counseling PM instead of a warning?

A counseling PM stays on your profile for a day (or that's how it was) and a warning stays on your profile for 3 months.

If I ever got in trouble (hope I don't ever) But I would rather get a counseling PM instead of a warning.

Just my thoughts.. Maybe its just me that feels that way.. But I thought I'd share my thoughts with you all.

I am not trying to start anything so staff please don't take it that way just want to voice my opinion.

God Bless,
Krissy_Cakes

no, actually the way it worked was that a counseling note was only effective for a day, but it stayed on your record permanently unless/until you asked specifically that it be removed. now since we have a new system, if it could be programed so that all those counseling notices (which are now extinct) could be removed, (just like an expiring link) that would be a good thing.

 

[HisAmyBeth]

I have a counseling PM that was set to expire on Jan 27th 2010...but is still on... why? I'd really appreciate that being removed as well.

 

[Hentenza]

I have a counseling PM that was set to expire on Jan 27th 2010...but is still on... why? I'd really appreciate that being removed as well.

Removed.

 

[pdudgeon]

and see, here's another great example above^^^.

the note expired but was not automatically removed, which is apparently still expected to happen by a majority of the members. in other words, in our minds, expires = automatic removal at the time of expiration.
had it been properly programed in the beginning, staff would not now have to deal with all the separate requests for removal.

my guess is that it was more important to staff at the time to establish a record of who had been previously contacted regarding a breaking of the rules, than it was to maintain an up-to-date record of offences. As a result NONE of the previous offences irregardless of their nature or severity are automatically removed at the time of expiration, unless the member (or staff) specifically requests that removal take place.

so has this problem of automatic removal been delt with in the new system, or do we have the same problem continuing on?

 

[Hentenza]

and see, here's another great example above^^^.

the note expired but was not automatically removed, which is apparently still expected to happen by a majority of the members. in other words, in our minds, expires = automatic removal at the time of expiration.
had it been properly programed in the beginning, staff would not now have to deal with all the separate requests for removal.

my guess is that it was more important to staff at the time to establish a record of who had been previously contacted regarding a breaking of the rules, than it was to maintain an up-to-date record of offences. As a result NONE of the previous offences irregardless of their nature or severity are automatically removed at the time of expiration, unless the member (or staff) specifically requests that removal take place.

so has this problem of automatic removal been delt with in the new system, or do we have the same problem continuing on?

It still continues. The issue is systemic and one that requires new code to fix. Personally, I don't see a fix in the near future. What we have done to counter this issue is to have the mods put in a request for removal of expired history every time someone is reported. This has worked relatively well except for when someone does not get reported again. We have to work with what we have.

BTW- Anyone can start a thread in the MSC requesting that their expired history be removed.

 

[Windmill]

I dislike punishment, I don't think it fixes behaviour, but just makes people bitter. So I would like to throw out there that, as an ex-staff member, I still prefered the very old system of counseling PM's all the time (no warnings/infractions) and bans on extreme circumstances, despite the workload.

 

[DeaconDean]

I have a counciling PM and two, count 'em, two, warnings that were reversed, still showing, any chance I could have these removed?

Also, under the old system I was moderating under, when a report came in, the post was temporarily deleted and a "heads up" note was sent to the member informing them that there post was under review and being deleted temporarily. This is not done anymore. To all of a sudden receive a warning or infraction out of the blue for (then) no reason would infuriate even me, as some staff have found out.

I would appreciate a heads up when I am reported so I may expect something such as a warning or something else may be forthcoming.

Thanks and

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Zecryphon]

Announcing the new Warning and Infraction system effective immediately
(July 23,2010)
​

We finally got around to seeking a simplistic Staff Action system, and we think we have got just the right one. Taken from lots of suggestions to reform our own complicated system and right from a CF member, we offer you our new W/I system:

Its a whole lot easier to understand, and use, and is a no nonsense approach to handling the reports generated on this huge site...

PENALTIES will be applied by means of

warnings
infractions
suspensions
permanent bans
​

- warnings carry 0 points and will remain active for 3 months
- infractions carry a 1 point penalty which will have a 'shelf life' of 6 months

Process is as follows:

1st incident: warning - 0 points
2nd incident: warning - 0 points
3rd incident: infraction - 1 point
4th incident: infraction - 2 points + one month's suspension
5th incident: infraction - 3 points + permanent ban

*As a member's staff actions expire, the escalation begins again.


To explain,
- if a member has two active warnings, or an active infraction, he will receives an infraction. Otherwise, he receives a warning.
- if a member gets 2 infraction points, they get a one month ban
- if 1 infraction point expires and they get another infraction, they get a one month ban again
- if they get 3 infraction points they will be permanently banned.

There will also be occasions when admins can apply bans because of other unacceptable behavior.


Thank you again those who over the past year have offered suggestions for simplifying the W /I system, for understanding all the frustration on and off staff with the amount of reports CF generates, and for trying to help curb the workload for our staff ... we really appreciate it

Those of you who would be banned right now according to this new system don't worry, we are not going to ban folks on their first infraction out the gate. We will spend some time looking at the records of those at risk of being banned right away and will study their old infractions vs new ones case by case.

If you do see your self coming close to being infracted out of CF, please take a good look and adjust your posting style right now!!! If you need our help, we have a great mentoring program in the MSC, ask for help there.....

MSC Member Services Center

Will this new rule system apply to staff as well?

 

[pdudgeon]

It still continues. The issue is systemic and one that requires new code to fix. Personally, I don't see a fix in the near future. What we have done to counter this issue is to have the mods put in a request for removal of expired history every time someone is reported. This has worked relatively well except for when someone does not get reported again. We have to work with what we have.

BTW- Anyone can start a thread in the MSC requesting that their expired history be removed.

ok, so how about inserting an expiration code for any expiring note, warning, or infraction that would automatically transfer said note, warning or infraction to a different forum designed to house expired stuff?

in other words, said note stays on the member profile for a specific amount of time. and after that date it is automatically transfered to another forum?

so if you don't see a fix in the near future, is that due to a lack of sufficient manpower to do the coding, a lack of knowledge needed to do the coding, or that it's just not that big of a deal compared to other things like constantly keeping the web site afloat?

sorry for being a pest, but it just seems that if banks can code start and stop programing on automatic transfers of cash, that a web site should have the capability to do something about expired warnings, etc.

and one last question....has anyone done a study to compare the man hours requred to code a fix, versus the man hours spent requesting and deleating expired history? (sort of like the time spent putting a working cap on an oil rig versus the amount of manhours needed for cleanup after a spill?)

 

[Hentenza]

I have a counciling PM and two, count 'em, two, warnings that were reversed, still showing, any chance I could have these removed?

Also, under the old system I was moderating under, when a report came in, the post was temporarily deleted and a "heads up" note was sent to the member informing them that there post was under review and being deleted temporarily. This is not done anymore. To all of a sudden receive a warning or infraction out of the blue for (then) no reason would infuriate even me, as some staff have found out.

I would appreciate a heads up when I am reported so I may expect something such as a warning or something else may be forthcoming.

Thanks and

God Bless

Till all are one.

Removed.

As to the heads up, in some cases the post will be removed from view and a pm sent pending consensus but it really depends on the post. We are still working with the first mod in does the removing if needed and that can be subjective. We tried removing all post when the post was reported but it really was not fair for those that were no violation.

 

[Hentenza]

Will this new rule system apply to staff as well?

Nope. When staff is reported the admins work the report with two action possibilities. If the post is a violation then a letter of council is issued or it could be ruled no violation. If an admin or a chaplain is reported then we, the advisors, will work the report.

 

[Hentenza]

ok, so how about inserting an expiration code for any expiring note, warning, or infraction that would automatically transfer said note, warning or infraction to a different forum designed to house expired stuff?

in other words, said note stays on the member profile for a specific amount of time. and after that date it is automatically transfered to another forum?

so if you don't see a fix in the near future, is that due to a lack of sufficient manpower to do the coding, a lack of knowledge needed to do the coding, or that it's just not that big of a deal compared to other things like constantly keeping the web site afloat?

sorry for being a pest, but it just seems that if banks can code start and stop programing on automatic transfers of cash, that a web site should have the capability to do something about expired warnings, etc.

and one last question....has anyone done a study to compare the man hours requred to code a fix, versus the man hours spent requesting and deleating expired history? (sort of like the time spent putting a working cap on an oil rig versus the amount of manhours needed for cleanup after a spill?)

You are being a pest.

Until the database can be better stabilized no new coding is being done. I think once the database it taken care of then new items will be worked. I don't have a time frame.

 

[Zecryphon]

Nope. When staff is reported the admins work the report with two action possibilities. If the post is a violation then a letter of council is issued or it could be ruled no violation. If an admin or a chaplain is reported then we, the advisors, will work the report.

Yeah, I didn't think it would. Some things never change. It sure would be nice if on this forum staff and members were held accountable to the same set of rules. Maybe one day.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Yeah, I didn't think it would. Some things never change. It sure would be nice if on this forum staff and members were held accountable to the same set of rules. Maybe one day.

What gives you the idea they aren't? Just curious

 

[Hentenza]

Yeah, I didn't think it would. Some things never change. It sure would be nice if on this forum staff and members were held accountable to the same set of rules. Maybe one day.

LOL!!! TBH, the admin review of a reported post can be brutal merely because a mod has no excuse of not knowing the rules.

Mods are held to higher standard. It's fair.

 

[psalms 91]

I can vouch for that as I am familiar with a staff that was reported for actions and posts and they were removed

 

[Angeldove97]

I like the plan--- sounds good I think we had something close to this before, hopefully no changes will have to be made.

Just wanted to throw in my two cents...
There is a reason for a different "system" for staffers and honestly, a staff punishment can be sometimes a lot worse than what is required of regular members. Staffers are held to very high accountability. Since this is done behind scenes usually, you'll just have to trust the Staff to do what is right--- and they will.

 

[Zecryphon]

What gives you the idea they aren't? Just curious

Well CaDan's career on staff here, plus my question and Hetenza's response of "no" when I asked if this new rule enforcement policy would apply to staff.

 

[pdudgeon]

You are being a pest.

Until the database can be better stabilized no new coding is being done. I think once the database it taken care of then new items will be worked. I don't have a time frame.

LOL i know, Henry and i understand about the importance of the database being stable, honnestly i do. but maybe the advisors need to address the situation of why policy is formed that cannot be fully and fairly enacted without destabalizing the database?

(in otherwords, like in political elections if a staff member puts up campaign posters, they should be held responsible for also taking them down after the election?? so if a staff member gives a notice, etc. then they are also responsible for removing said notice after it expires.

that's the only way i can see this current system working, and all members and staff being treated fairly, while we work with the reality of a destabalized data base.)

 

[Hentenza]

LOL i know, Henry and i understand about the importance of the database being stable, honnestly i do. but maybe the advisors need to address the situation of why policy is formed that cannot be fully and fairly enacted without destabalizing the database?

(in otherwords, like in political elections if a staff member puts up campaign posters, they should be held responsible for also taking them down after the election?? so if a staff member gives a notice, etc. then they are also responsible for removing said notice after it expires.

that's the only way i can see this current system working, and all members and staff being treated fairly, while we work with the reality of a destabalized data base.)

Mmm...you are loosing me. How can the new protocol not be able to be enacted fairly or fully just because the actions don't fall of automatically?