[Vote] Remove the SIR requirement to pass intro

Hi guys so there is a small bottleneck with processing the intros and that is the SIR section.

What we propose is we no longer make that a requirement but instead the admins that check the SIRs will retroactively look at them and users that do not respond to their information requests are immediately demoted.

This has some repurcussions in that the 10 percent invite section is less secure.

This has NOT been implemented yet but a decision will be made taking a site vote into account.

Think back to your own intro process. Was it too long? If so you should vote to get rid off the SIRs.

[brightsm]

I have a 50 - 50 feeling about this.

[Hearts]

Same here 50-50. Can you explain what is the SIR?

Since the 33% and the 55% isn't that active, i feel this is a good chance to allow these two sub-forum to be utilized.

Also feel that this will encourage more users to do more background checks.

[TheWickerMan]

Sounds good to me...

[Reload]

I understand what the intention is, but has an old Gatekeeper, i really think that it doesn't take that too much time to include the SIR to complete the intro process. My point is that, if we take the SIR out, the only thing that will have a greater change is the security level on the forum. The intro process will not have that change impact.

[jrsauce]

Absolutely. I remember I had problems waiting too long before my intro got accepted.

[TankGirl]

The SIR is a Suspect Intro Report and its a further check thats done by the Senior Staff of the forum (usually me). There are multiple reasons as to why this check takes place and you will forgive me if I don't go into details as to what exactly we do but suffice to say that if an intro gets flagged for an SIR check then something has alerted the crew and they feel that it should be looked into more thoroughly (previous trading, member of trading sites, reasons for being disabled etc). This is the reason why some introductions take a little longer to get through the process than others and for that I apologise.

@jrsauce ~ You waited 3 days, thats not exactly a long time when you take into consideration the number of applicants that have to be processed versus the number of intro workers we have, add into that the fact that you submitted your intro near Xmas and each member of the intro team is a volunteer so they do have RL to attend to besides that your intro was not subjected to an SIR.

[The_Newbie]

I agree with Reload and TankGirl.
The SIRs add an extra layer of security when users want to join us and really, it doesn't take that long to complete a SIR.
So, in my honest opinion, the SIR process shouldn't be removed.

it doesn't take that long to complete a SIR..

How can you in all honesty make this remark when there are SIRs waiting a Month to be completed. Do you actually feel that it is courteous to have a person wait a Month to be accepted onto a Forum. I for one would rather have all checks done on the spot by Sr.Staff , on an ad hoc basis per say. This will increase the persons doing said checks and make the process a bit quicker imo. I do not think it is feasible to have the whole process of admittance onto the Forum dependent on one person

[The_Newbie]

How can you in all honesty make this remark when there are SIRs waiting a Month to be completed. Do you actually feel that it is courteous to have a person wait a Month to be accepted onto a Forum. I for one would rather have all checks done on the spot by Sr.Staff , on an ad hoc basis per say. This will increase the persons doing said checks and make the process a bit quicker imo. I do not think it is feasible to have the whole process of admittance onto the Forum dependent on one person

I agree with you shadowbuild but it was not a problem until recently. About a month ago, all SIRs were completed within 3-4 days of placing them.
But, we also can't put aside the importance of a SIR. If we don't have a SIR at all, then this will become a forum no different from others where traders/scammers reside.

But I do hope that some method is derived to complete SIRs quicker than the pace with which they are completed now rather than their complete removal.

[jcarter7]

Doing SIRs retroactively will allow scammers/traders/cheaters a few days to do a lot of damage in the 10% section. And then even if they do get banned all they will have to do is create a new account and they will have another few days to do the same again, etc.

I think this would discourage people to give invites in the 10% section and also to anyone who has given/received an invite in that section . In my opinion, the 10% section is already too insecure in that anyone can view it.

[TankGirl]

How can you in all honesty make this remark when there are SIRs waiting a Month to be completed. Do you actually feel that it is courteous to have a person wait a Month to be accepted onto a Forum. I for one would rather have all checks done on the spot by Sr.Staff , on an ad hoc basis per say. This will increase the persons doing said checks and make the process a bit quicker imo. I do not think it is feasible to have the whole process of admittance onto the Forum dependent on one person

What is the problem with you doing them now? What you are suggesting is exactly what is happening at the moment except for the fact the requests are put into a table so that ANY of the S.Staff with the necessary permissions can do the checks. What you are suggesting will lead to checks being missed (if completed at all) and is completely reliant on a member of staff being around monitoring IRC or indeed checking their pm's plus how do the other staff know if the requested checks have been done/completed? How do you feedback information to the whole of the intro crew if there is a problem? (bear in mind that intro's can be precessed by any intro member at any stage, answering the intro does not mean that crew member is solely responsible for it from start to finish).

The only issue with the current system is the fact that certain members of the S.Staff can't edit the table, well thats a permissions issue and it does NOT prevent you or any of the other S.Staff helping.

Doing SIRs retroactively will allow scammers/traders/cheaters a few days to do a lot of damage in the 10% section. And then even if they do get banned all they will have to do is create a new account and they will have another few days to do the same again, etc.

I think this would discourage people to give invites in the 10% section and also to anyone who has given/received an invite in that section . In my opinion, the 10% section is already too insecure in that anyone can view it.

How do you even know what is being discussed in the Staff section atm. Obviously this is not your true opinion and you are just repeating what is being fed to you. This discussion was not to discuss what was presented in the Staff section but rather review the necessity of the SIR process. When I propose an ad hoc process I meant an on the spot SIR performed by a member of Sr.Staff on the spot not a retroactive check done after the applicant was already accepted.

The issue at hand was one that you yourself specifically brought to my attention the delay in the SIR process, you all can not have it both way. Either intros are taking too long to be process or not.

You all have an opportunity to voice your opinion and make a change if that is what is mandated, but everyone must remember that the outcome of this vote is what you have to live with. Do not come back later on with the same gripe that intros are being delayed if you are advocated the necessity of the SIR procedure on this vote. In other words you have to practice what you preach now

What is the problem with you doing them now?.

Nothing at all, I am just tire of the bitching that comes out every time I do attempt to help out. I am beyond the bs already. Truth of the matter is that I feel SIR accomplish nothing that an ad hoc check do. You are of a different opinion and I respect that, the issue is not the SIRs but the time that they sit waiting to be process. I have even gone to the extent to tell others to do the checks and that I would edit the list as they perform these checks for them to no avail. Seems like no one wants the backlash that comes from doing these checks imo.

Something needs to be done as again delays on intros hurt our bottom line, and once again it is not prudent to have the dependency of new admittance at the mercy of one Staffer. This makes no sense when we are a Team and should work as such

[TankGirl]

Nothing at all, I am just tire of the bitching that comes out every time I do attempt to help out. I am beyond the bs already. Truth of the matter is that I feel SIR accomplish nothing that an ad hoc check do. You are of a different opinion and I respect that, the issue is not the SIRs but the time that they sit waiting to be process. I have even gone to the extent to tell others to do the checks and that I would edit the list as they perform these checks for them to no avail. Seems like no one wants the backlash that comes from doing these checks imo.

Something needs to be done as again delays on intros hurt our bottom line, and once again it is not prudent to have the dependency of new admittance at the mercy of one Staffer. This makes no sense when we are a Team and should work as such

The ad hoc system is flawed and that is why it was changed, I have explained as to why in my previous post. The issue is not the way they are done its the number of people doing them and i have already suggested a solution for that in the staff discussion.

With regards to the comment about the mercy of one staffer (which is most definately aimed at me since I am the only person actually doing the SIR checks). I have not stopped anyone from doing them including you but as far as I am aware you havent done any SIR's, infact everytime someone asks you about intro you claim that you dont deal with it so I don't see how you can say that any of us have bitched at you when you try to help. You claim that we should work as a team well then get on the wagon and start helping out and we won't suffer from delays will we?

[brightsm]

SIRs are a good way to remove scammers/traders/cheaters before they do any damage. But the system is not self sufficient IMO. I have seen users who were VIP getting banned for trading/selling invites. It's not too hard to get a new identity in digital world. A little knowledge and some money should be enough. I once invited a user to a tracker where he got banned after a couple of days. I couldn't put him to CB as i was not given a direct reason for the ban but was advised not to invite anyone from his living place anymore.

My whole point is if scammers can get inside even if the system is in place then why bother? T-I is a forum after all and users are the main life force.

Also at the same time I don't feel too good to live with no security at all.

That's why i have 50 - 50 feeling towards this.