Moderation Point System Discussion

[SDS]

Hey everyone... 3-0!!! How 'bout them Bills??? Let's keep it going.... 👊

 

I'd like to ask for constructive input on community moderation. Our software has a ton of features that we have never used and it may be time to provide some structure. I'm hoping that provides a more methodical and more informed way to keep this train chugging along in a smooth way. FYI, off-topic/"funny"/inappropriate posts will be deleted. Here is what I want to know:

 

1. We have several default areas of concern: Politics, COVID-19, Inappropriate Language, Abusive Behavior, Inappropriate Avatar, Topic Bumping. Are there any other typical bad posts that fall into a category I am missing?

 

2. Each of those categories have default point values from 0-5. What do you think they should be?

 

3. What should happen to a member if they rack up X number of points? (Each time that get a point - the user is warned.) This can range from being able to read and not post to removing all access to the community.

 

4. Should points expire? If so, how long should they remain?

 

5. Should there be an appeals process (post restriction/banning) and what would this look like?

 

This is just feedback. We may disagree on what you say. Your feedback may not be feasible either. regardless, thoughtful replies are appreciated.

 

Thanks.

[SoTier]

I think that perhaps there should be a time consideration for how long a poster takes to earn a certain number of points that earns them a suspension -- like with driver's licenses where getting too many points in 3 years warrants a suspension.  There's a big difference between a poster who earns 5 points over 2 years and another who earns 5 points over 2 months.

[DrDawkinstein]

As a well grizzled veteran of the Warning Points System, I'd say it's pretty good as it is.

 

My only suggestions:

 

4. Points should expire after a certain amount of time. 1 year?

 

5. The poster side of me wants an appeals process, but I know without a doubt that would just be a world of stupid BS for you mods to deal with since EVERYONE would appeal.

[Lfod]

In my opinion, off topic post/responses and abusive behavior is what I would treat the harshest. I'm not as bothered by a lot of the other stuff listed but that's just me. 

 

I think sometimes you really have to just look at things on a case to case basis and factor in a persons history of behavior. 

 

I can only say that I think moderation is already good. 

[H2o]

I've been slapped on the wrist a couple of times by Hap. Once a couple of years ago and once in 2019. I feel like I've been a quality citizen since and have earned the removal of my ankle monitor. 

 

My apologies, it was 3 times. Twice in 2018 and once in 2019. A model of impeccable character ever since. 

Edited September 29, 2020 by H2o

[SDS]

1 minute ago, Lfod said:

In my opinion, off topic post/responses and abusive behavior is what I would treat the harshest. I'm not as bothered by a lot of the other stuff listed but that's just me. 

 

I think sometimes you really have to just look at things on a case to case basis and factor in a persons history of behavior. 

 

I can only say that I think moderation is already good. 

 

A structure will help mod to mod variability and keep the insults down a little.

[Kwai San]

11 minutes ago, SDS said:

Hey everyone... 3-0!!! How 'bout them Bills??? Let's keep it going.... 👊

 

I'd like to ask for constructive input on community moderation. Our software has a ton of features that we have never used and it may be time to provide some structure. I'm hoping that provides a more methodical and more informed way to keep this train chugging along in a smooth way. FYI, off-topic/"funny"/inappropriate posts will be deleted. Here is what I want to know:

 

1. We have several default areas of concern: Politics, COVID-19, Inappropriate Language, Abusive Behavior, Inappropriate Avatar, Topic Bumping. Are there any other typical bad posts that fall into a category I am missing?

 

2. Each of those categories have default point values from 0-5. What do you think they should be?

 

3. What should happen to a member if they rack up X number of points? (Each time that get a point - the user is warned.) This can range from being able to read and not post to removing all access to the community.

 

4. Should points expire? If so, how long should they remain?

 

5. Should there be an appeals process and what would this look like?

 

This is just feedback. We may disagree on what you say. Your feedback may not be feasible either. regardless, thoughtful replies are appreciated.

 

Thanks.

1 - pretty much have them all

2 - assign 1 point each BUT let the poster know they are getting dinged

3 - 5 points in less than a month a one week break and it keeps going. 

4 - If you can go 2 months with no points one gets deducted.  Something like that....gotta keep it simple tho you guys have enough work.

5 - Let em appeal - you guys are the mods you decide, their past and more importantly their future will determine their ability to stay on the board

 

Bottom line make up what you like - roll it out AND enforce it.  I would go out a limb and say 95% of us here would support it.

[Virgil]

18 minutes ago, SDS said:

1. We have several default areas of concern: Politics, COVID-19, Inappropriate Language, Abusive Behavior, Inappropriate Avatar, Topic Bumping. Are there any other typical bad posts that fall into a category I am missing?  Derailing, Post Boosting/Repetitive Posts

 

2. Each of those categories have default point values from 0-5. What do you think they should be? Don't understand that question 🥴

 

3. What should happen to a member if they rack up X number of points? (Each time that get a point - the user is warned.) This can range from being able to read and not post to removing all access to the community.  Three warnings then ban

 

4. Should points expire? If so, how long should they remain?  Yes, 90 Days

 

5. Should there be an appeals process and what would this look like?  No, you were told 3 times

 

This is just feedback. We may disagree on what you say. Your feedback may not be feasible either. regardless, thoughtful replies are appreciated.

 

Thanks.

 

[SDS]

2 minutes ago, Virgil said:

2. Each of those categories have default point values from 0-5. What do you think they should be? Don't understand that question 

 

Topic bumping (rarely used) may not by point worthy. So, default is 0. Maybe abusive behavior is really bad so default is 2 points for a warning.

1 minute ago, Gene1973 said:

I would vote for less moderation.

 

that does not correspond to a question asked.

[DrDawkinstein]

1 minute ago, SDS said:

 

Topic bumping (rarely used) may not by point worthy. So, default is 0. Maybe abusive behavior is really bad so default is 2 points for a warning.

 

Not to get too into the weeds, but what are the parameters for Topic Bumping to be a bad thing? If there were a couple threads from last week that I wanted to bring back up because maybe something changed, I wouldnt think that's a problem.

[Fan in Chicago]

20 minutes ago, SDS said:

Hey everyone... 3-0!!! How 'bout them Bills??? Let's keep it going.... 👊

 

I'd like to ask for constructive input on community moderation. Our software has a ton of features that we have never used and it may be time to provide some structure. I'm hoping that provides a more methodical and more informed way to keep this train chugging along in a smooth way. FYI, off-topic/"funny"/inappropriate posts will be deleted. Here is what I want to know:

 

1. We have several default areas of concern: Politics, COVID-19, Inappropriate Language, Abusive Behavior, Inappropriate Avatar, Topic Bumping. Are there any other typical bad posts that fall into a category I am missing?

 

2. Each of those categories have default point values from 0-5. What do you think they should be?

 

3. What should happen to a member if they rack up X number of points? (Each time that get a point - the user is warned.) This can range from being able to read and not post to removing all access to the community.

 

4. Should points expire? If so, how long should they remain?

 

5. Should there be an appeals process and what would this look like?

 

This is just feedback. We may disagree on what you say. Your feedback may not be feasible either. regardless, thoughtful replies are appreciated.

 

Thanks.

1. Add "crusades"

2. Points should be based on severity of impact to the community. (More severe, more points).

    Politics, COVID-19=1

    Topic bumping =2

     Inappropriate avatar = 3

     Inapp Language = 4

     Abusive behavior = 5 

 

3. 10 points = post only

     15 points = vacation

     25+ points = 1 year ban

      Do we need a permanent ban ?

 

4. Need some kind of probation system. As an example, if someone gets a vacation and "earns" a certain number of points in a defined period of time, he automatically gets the next level of punishment

as an example, if someone comes back from vacation and gets another 10 points within a month, he gets a 1 year ban

 

5. Appeals should apply to bans only else it will be too much work for the mods.

 

[NoSaint]

I’d put abusive behavior, slurs and such pretty high On the penalty spectrum and off topic relatively low as conversations can meander easily without harm. Rarely do interesting conversations stay strictly on topic.
 

as long as respectful I see zero harm with politics/Covid/whatever, especially on off the wall and have been disappointed by that recently getting shut down. Politics is too wide a topic to just tuck in the corner and pretend doesn’t exist- just be kind and adult about it. Just my two cents if opening the door to a discussion on moderation and penalties.

 

id say let points expire pretty fast if establishing thresholds for penalty

Edited September 29, 2020 by NoSaint

[SDS]

1 minute ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Not to get too into the weeds, but what are the parameters for Topic Bumping to be a bad thing? If there were a couple threads from last week that I wanted to bring back up because maybe something changed, I wouldnt think that's a problem.

 

It's rarely used. It's mainly for someone who posts an uninteresting topic and then keeps "bumping" it for it to be seen, yet it still gets avoided. It's been here for years. Don't sweat it.

[Johnnycage46]

13 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

As a well grizzled veteran of the Warning Points System, I'd say it's pretty good as it is.

 

My only suggestions:

 

4. Points should expire after a certain amount of time. 1 year?

 

5. The poster side of me wants an appeals process, but I know without a doubt that would just be a world of stupid BS for you mods to deal with since EVERYONE would appeal.

 

I agree on the points expiring after, let's say a year without any infractions.  I've had (still have as they don't expire currently) points against me but I've tried my best to not break the rules anymore and I think a good faith effort to straighten up on the part of a poster with infractions should be taken into consideration.  After all, if a poster gets points, then cleans up their act...the points did their job and I think it makes sense to reset the poster's points.

 

[Just Joshin']

First thanks for the site and the work it entails.

 

I am not opposed to the concept but I am worried about the admin work to support.  The mods are volunteers (I believe) and this could create an overload for them to manage.

 

Whatever direction you head, I suggest it be a light touch but if you need to warn make it a heavy penalty.  If someone crosses the well defined line then penalize with a suspension with a defined time out.  If they are repeat offenders, ban them.  So, make the offenses fewer but react quicker/with more severe consequences.

 

This board is not a right but a privilege and those here should treat it as such.

[eball]

1 - Politics, covid, abusive behavior, and haphazard topic starting are the worst in my opinion.  I think we are mostly adults on this forum and I don't really believe there should be "language" moderation since it is a part of everyday speech.  We're not in church.  If the language isn't directed at another poster, why censor it?  In this day and age are we truly worried about (s  h  i  t) in written form?

 

2 - politics 1, covid 1, abusive behavior 5, haphazard thread starting 2.

 

3 - accumulate 7 points within a 3-month period and have posting privileges revoked for two weeks (can still read the board).  Two points are removed every month, provided no additional violations within that time. (this addresses #4 as well)

 

5 - no appeals unless the violation is for alleged abusive behavior; a mod would ask both the accused as well as the victim for an explanation, and then determine if the full five pts are assessed or a reduced number.

 

My $.02, anyway.

[3rdand12]

 Tough job these days. what you  and our Mods have to filter then decide on the day to day.
Respect that.
 my only concern is how you define the line of an argument taking place.
arguing facts is not a bad thing
 and i hope maybe there is an expected amount of back and forth that should work itself out.
 
my only point really?

 Thank you ^

Edited September 29, 2020 by 3rdand12

[DrDawkinstein]

Just now, SDS said:

 

It's rarely used. It's mainly for someone who posts an uninteresting topic and then keeps "bumping" it for it to be seen, yet it still gets avoided. It's been here for years. Don't sweat it.

 

Thanks, wasnt so much worried about my example, just curious if there was a behavior I was missing. Like someone bumping all their own topics to "take over" the main page. I've seen that in PPP, but since that's non-moderated I didnt think much of it.

[Fan in Chicago]

1 minute ago, Gene1973 said:

You really think people who get a 1 year ban come back at all? 

Its that person's choice. I dont know the stats to answer your question.

[DrDawkinstein]

1 minute ago, eball said:

1 - Politics, covid, abusive behavior, and haphazard topic starting are the worst in my opinion.  I think we are mostly adults on this forum and I don't really believe there should be "language" moderation since it is a part of everyday speech.  We're not in church.  If the language isn't directed at another poster, why censor it?  In this day and age are we truly worried about (s  h  i  t) in written form?

 

 

Yes, we are all adults, but I also like that we are BY FAR the classiest message board you will find. I dont think about it often, but then go to some other team's message board and they all sound like crass, uneducated, cheap-shot neanderthals because of all the swearing. Those policies definitely raise the level of posting here. JMHO.