Thread: Banning Suggestions

To the top for more input on proposed ideas to (i) increase transparency of banned user history and/or (ii) implement a negative rep system for infractions/bans.

Personally I'm opposed to both ideas.

As people have said, I think making bans/infractions history available will most certainly have a negative overall effect. I can see people starting giveaways with requirements such as "No previous Bans/Infractions". I mean what is the upside? So you can see who has spammed before? Even though many users spam and get away with it... Or so you can see if someone has received an infraction for something they did on a tracker even though mostly they are just banned. Plus the same information is available if you just search the chopping block. Also, infraction notes are at the moment a private message between mod and user and having them made public wasn't taken into consideration when they were written and to open that to everyone may give the wrong idea to many users as they only see one side of the story.

As for leaving the reason they were temp banned in the ban list that's akin to labeling an ex-con CRIMINAL across his back after release, haven't they been punished already?

Negative repping for infractions/bans is also a bad idea IMO, as many of the new users make mistakes and will be labeled with red reputation as they first start off, due to not fully understanding the rules properly. It's hard enough to advance in this community as a brand new user without the stigma of red reputation as soon as you start. I know everyone should know the rules but even if you read them fully, there is a great deal to take in.

thedeh makes some valid points. I have to admit if I do have access to anyone's list of infractions and negative rep, I'll not only think twice but maybe even a third or fourth time before handing out any invitations to said members. This may be seen as a positive act, but considering you've dropped even lower on my potential list of candidates, I don't think anyone would support the idea. Even if Dave limits this to certain classes, it would do no good for you if I, or another labeled-class user, is the inviter.

Again, what thedeh have mentioned regarding past infractions, if the user is still a member here, he have suffered the consequences and will most likely think twice before repeating similar actions. The only infractions I would consider relevant are tracker-related issues, but most of these turn out to be permanent bans so it's rather moot in this situation.

I do support your proposed idea for negative rep. Approach 3 is probably the best way to implement the idea if it follows through. thedeh stated infractions given to a user by a mod should stay private between the two parties. I agree completely. I've never received an infraction so I don't know if other mods (we could safely assume Jenna doesn't) slaps you with a negative rep, but aside from a suspension of their account I believe an amount of negative rep is well-deserved.

I don't think spam posts should fall under this system since we have the groan button and members are actively using it in such situations. Although, excessive spam is debatable.

Taking thedeh's post into consideration, I think there should be a duration - a safe period - where new members have a chance to learn the rules and to observe what type of posts and actions are disapproved. If you've been here for about three months, that should be a decent duration for you to have a grasp of the basic no-nos of our community.

Originally Posted by Rellik

To the top for more input on proposed ideas to (i) increase transparency of banned user history and/or (ii) implement a negative rep system for infractions/bans.

Rellik, do not bump your thread. If people are interested in posting they will.

Originally Posted by thedeh

Personally I'm opposed to both ideas.

As people have said, I think making bans/infractions history available will most certainly have a negative overall effect. I can see people starting giveaways with requirements such as "No previous Bans/Infractions". I mean what is the upside? So you can see who has spammed before? Even though many users spam and get away with it... Or so you can see if someone has received an infraction for something they did on a tracker even though mostly they are just banned. Plus the same information is available if you just search the chopping block. Also, infraction notes are at the moment a private message between mod and user and having them made public wasn't taken into consideration when they were written and to open that to everyone may give the wrong idea to many users as they only see one side of the story.

As for leaving the reason they were temp banned in the ban list that's akin to labeling an ex-con CRIMINAL across his back after release, haven't they been punished already?

Negative repping for infractions/bans is also a bad idea IMO, as many of the new users make mistakes and will be labeled with red reputation as they first start off, due to not fully understanding the rules properly. It's hard enough to advance in this community as a brand new user without the stigma of red reputation as soon as you start. I know everyone should know the rules but even if you read them fully, there is a great deal to take in.

thedeh, I appreciate your feedback and see your points. My suggestion was certainly not meant to be the digital equivalent of leaving temp banned users in the public stockade as an example to all, but rather to increase the security for inviters by giving them the clearest picture possible of potential invitees. That is the upside that prompted my suggestion. Based on your comments and el2em's below, perhaps I misjudged the impact of making ban/negative rep history public as inviters may in practice not take the totality of a user's history here into account and instead would in essence rule out invites for solid forum citizens due to a minor error in their past. I would certainly not want that to happen. I do, however, still believe that the third option I outlined above is a useful and viable change in how reputation is calculated. Reputation should be a proxy for a user's trustworthiness (including at what point a user qualifies for trusted giveaways) and not having a downward ratchet for certain bans (and perhaps infractions) leaves an inaccurate picture to inviters who are risking their accounts and invite trees based on various data points of trust on this forum. The potential impact on new members (my thoughts on that below) is not sufficient in my opinion to discard the idea in its entirety.

Originally Posted by el2em

I do support your proposed idea for negative rep. Approach 3 is probably the best way to implement the idea if it follows through. thedeh stated infractions given to a user by a mod should stay private between the two parties. I agree completely. I've never received an infraction so I don't know if other mods (we could safely assume Jenna doesn't) slaps you with a negative rep, but aside from a suspension of their account I believe an amount of negative rep is well-deserved.

I don't think spam posts should fall under this system since we have the groan button and members are actively using it in such situations. Although, excessive spam is debatable.

Taking thedeh's post into consideration, I think there should be a duration - a safe period - where new members have a chance to learn the rules and to observe what type of posts and actions are disapproved. If you've been here for about three months, that should be a decent duration for you to have a grasp of the basic no-nos of our community.

I am not necessarily opposed to a safe harbor as el2em suggests above, although I believe any such safe harbor should be a shorter duration; perhaps one month or so to get acclimated here. The concern I have with a safe harbor is that it still provides an artificial picture of a user's reputation in my opinion, but I would want to see the outlines of what would qualify for a downward ratchet in rep before passing final judgment. Both thedeh and el2em make convincing points regarding the purpose/nature of infractions, so I would defer to those with more of a history in that department as to whether there are any infractions for conduct that so affect a user's trustworthiness that a negative rep adjustment is justified. Based on the feedback above, it would seem the answer is no.

I entirely agree with the last part of your suggestion. If doing the right thing means we earn rep points, it follows we should lose some for doing wrong.

I'm very respectful of the amount of rep you've accumulated (Rellik) in a short period of time (how did you do that?) and I realise where you're heading, but I've found T-I (Staff in particular) to be a largely very helpful community that doesn't ban or warn unless neccesary.

I had a guy that I gave an invite to who messed me around a bit and I probably should have put him on the 'chopping block', but with a couple of PM's about 'name change' and how to improve his ratio on a private tracker he sorted it out. I get the impression had you come across the same user, he'd be banned by now.

I found your avatar and name a little threatening, particularly considering you're making suggestions about banning at such an early stage.
I'm fairly new here myself and I think it's important to learn the community before making this level of suggestion.

Originally Posted by guy

I found your avatar and name a little threatening, particularly considering you're making suggestions about banning at such an early stage.
I'm fairly new here myself and I think it's important to learn the community before making this level of suggestion.

I am Disagree with you all Person have their right that No one is Higher or Greater Than any one In short time he can understand community's policy on banning so he give out his suggestion

fact is one person takes too long time to learn what entire system is but one Entuziastic person can learn all thing things in short time period I think this suggestion is at accurate at this time

some time this function increase reliablity on user that if that user never get infraction the inviter can rely on him but he get infraction in frequent intervals we cannot rely on him

on another hand if the infracted person taking serious their infraction and recovering from it and in the way to dedication towards T-I and he have infraction hence that's not so easy for him to get invite because of this history viewing of banned /infraction .

But i am with you Rellik for this suggestion because f this history we can rely on good people and give them invites.

Originally Posted by guy

I entirely agree with the last part of your suggestion. If doing the right thing means we earn rep points, it follows we should lose some for doing wrong.

I'm very respectful of the amount of rep you've accumulated (Rellik) in a short period of time (how did you do that?) and I realise where you're heading, but I've found T-I (Staff in particular) to be a largely very helpful community that doesn't ban or warn unless neccesary.

Guy, I completely agree with you that the T-I staff (and generally the community at large) are very helpful and are not in the business of capricious displays of power or arbitrary bannings. In my view, that strengthens my proposal because we are really talking about members whose actions are egregious as compared to the membership at large. Inviters should have available to them relevant data on these users, and I believe my proposal does just that.

Originally Posted by guy

I had a guy that I gave an invite to who messed me around a bit and I probably should have put him on the 'chopping block', but with a couple of PM's about 'name change' and how to improve his ratio on a private tracker he sorted it out. I get the impression had you come across the same user, he'd be banned by now.

Not true. I have an invitee who got off to a rocky start at a tracker and I sent him a pm with specific tips on how to improve his ratio at the tracker. But yes, if I see a blatant spammer or a scammer or a ratio cheat, I'd put that person up on the chopping block with no hesitation. I believe that T-I has rather generous standards for admission (look at the time and effort intro mods spend with applicants with deficient applications, even quite deficient applications). However, once you are here at T-I, you should be judged by your actions and if your actions call into question your trustworthiness, that information should be available to inviters who have a lot at stake when pressing the "invite" button.

Originally Posted by guy

I found your avatar and name a little threatening, particularly considering you're making suggestions about banning at such an early stage.
I'm fairly new here myself and I think it's important to learn the community before making this level of suggestion.

Hey, Hasdiel did fine work on my avatar . Suffice to say that my avatar is a play off my legit name and the background behind why I chose my name is offtopic for this thread. As for your implication that I am not qualified to offer this suggestion, I respectfully disagree and believe that my proposal is a worthwhile one and should not be discounted on account of my join date.