[Twosugars]

how many points per an infraction?
and when does an infarction expire?

[Twosugars]

I got one last night, for being off-topic (defending Dezzy). I'm very pleased with myself, don't mind getting punished if the cause is just

[Ashley.]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

I got one last night, for being off-topic (defending Dezzy). I'm very pleased with myself, don't mind getting punished if the cause is just

Ungrateful little devil!

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Depends on how long the Infraction lasts for, if an infraction expires before they commit their next rule break then their next infraction may not knock them into a ban otherwise they would just be banned again.

The system is basically meant to deter someone from repeated offences, I believe.

Probably about to piss a load of people off, but it seems like a good system to me tbh.
I’d imagine people hate it because some probably have on occaision received a lengthy ban for what looks like something silly, when actually they just have several in-date infractions

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Ashley.

Ungrateful little devil!

pleased to meet you

[Rob!]

Originally Posted by Withano

Probably about to piss a load of people off, but it seems like a good system to me tbh.
I’d imagine people hate it because some probably have on occaision received a lengthy ban for what looks like something silly, when actually they just have several in-date infractions

Exactly, which seems ridiculous to me. Especially when two people are in an argument and one is behaving far worse than the other.

[Ashley.]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

pleased to meet you

That was to Dezzy, not you.

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Ashley.

That was to Dezzy, not you.

duh
but, but... oh ok, it's late

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Rob!

Exactly, which seems ridiculous to me. Especially when two people are in an argument and one is behaving far worse than the other.

If they behave worse than the other, they should get more points than the other I agree, I missed the whole drama of it all, but it did seem hastily dealt with perhaps if every single person just got a default 3 points for being there


- but I mean, surely people can correctly assume whether they’re over 9 points or coming close to it, and they should use that hunch as a way to detain themselves somewhat?! maybe a notification or warning sign could be added for them? as a way to remind them to wait until a few infractions expire before they seek justice.

I know that discussions been had before - about how we dont show points anymore because people would wait until they were in the clear before breaking rules... but it would make tibb seem nicer, even if it was all fake!

[Rob!]

Originally Posted by Withano

If they behave worse than the other, they should get more points than the other I agree, I missed the whole drama of it all, but it did seem hastily dealt with perhaps if every single person just got a default 3 points for being there


- but I mean, surely people can correctly assume whether they’re over 9 points or coming close to it, and they should use that hunch as a way to detain themselves somewhat?! maybe a notification or warning sign could be added for them? as a way to remind them to wait until a few infractions expire before they seek justice.

I know there is a reasonable logic behind the theory that “members should just obey the rules” but using my own history with infractions as an example, when someone is being blatantly bigoted and it’s clear they’re deliberately doing so, it’s going to make me stand up for whichever minority I might be a part of, homophobia for example. When said members are allowed to continue posting the same sort of thing and yet other people seem to be the ones getting infracted and banned, it doesn’t seem fair at all, in fact it just looks like they are being allowed to continue with their behaviour, so I don’t see how it can not be expected that arguments are going to break out?

[Ashley.]

It's a lose-lose situation, though. Give one member a more severe punishment than another, and it's considered unfair. Give both members the same punishment, it's still considered unfair.

[Rob!]

Originally Posted by Ashley.

It's a lose-lose situation, though. Give one member a more severe punishment than another, and it's considered unfair. Give both members the same punishment, it's still considered unfair.

Exactly. Which, in itself, would suggest that maybe the current system doesn't work?

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Rob!

I know there is a reasonable logic behind the theory that “members should just obey the rules” but using my own history with infractions as an example, when someone is being blatantly bigoted and it’s clear they’re deliberately doing so, it’s going to make me stand up for whichever minority I might be a part of, homophobia for example. When said members are allowed to continue posting the same sort of thing and yet other people seem to be the ones getting infracted and banned, it doesn’t seem fair at all, in fact it just looks like they are being allowed to continue with their behaviour, so I don’t see how it can not be expected that arguments are going to break out?

I’d like to think you wouldn’t be infracted for that unless you insult the person who you’re arguing with? And the person you’re arguing with would be infracted for their homophobia?
But if that sort of thing aint happening, then I agree, its one of the things that needs to be changed.

Its the ‘baiting’ infraction that winds me up. So many members have hundreds, or thousands (literally) of baiting posts

[Rob!]

Originally Posted by Withano

I’d like to think you wouldn’t be infracted for that unless you insult the person who you’re arguing with? And the person you’re arguing with would be infracted for their homophobia?
But if that sort of thing aint happening, then I agree, its one of the things that needs to be changed.

Its the ‘baiting’ infraction that winds me up. So many members have hundreds, or thousands (literally) of baiting posts

Oh, I won't deny, certainly I have been infracted for insulting members, but I haven't done it with a disregard for the rules, it's because of simple defence. If someone is being outright homophobic with complete disregard for a large part of the forum, I don't see why they should be granted with any respect. Maybe that's wrong of me and lowering myself to their level, but I think that their offence is worse.

[Ashley.]

Originally Posted by Rob!

Exactly. Which, in itself, would suggest that maybe the current system doesn't work?

But can a system be applied to the forum that would be universally accepted by all members? The system now I believe works quite well, I mean I've gone quite a long time without receiving an infraction and there are probably quite a few others (perhaps a majority) that could say the same... To change a system that seems to be working for the majority of the forum would be to please a few.

[Jordan.]

The system is completely fair, if you don't want a longer ban than others don't keep repeat offending, simple.

[Ross.]

This thread is literally this gif

[RileyH]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

The system is completely fair, if you don't want a longer ban than others don't keep repeat offending, simple.

tbh

[Ninastar]

My main issue isnt so much with S&D as I have a pretty strange/weird view of things in comparison to the majority of people on TiBB... but my main issue is of course allowing previously permabanned members to come back.

It pisses me off that there has been plenty of people who have been 'permabanned' for doing really ****ty, awful things and then are allowed back on within months. Whats the point in a 'permaban' if its not... well permanent?

[Ninastar]

and I know the same few people will be shouting OBSESSED LMAO!!!! But i dont give a ****. Plenty of people have messaged me saying they feel the same and some people dont want to post anymore because of it

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

The system is completely fair, if you don't want a longer ban than others don't keep repeat offending, simple.

Im gonna have to agree. Especially with the points:ban explanation that Dezzy mentioned on the last page. Those points are more than fair.

[reece(:]

I agree with the system being fine as is

[Maru]

Honestly shocked that this board is all global moderators. That's a problem. There should be 1-2 global moderators who can cover in separate sections if there is a gap ... but there absolutely should not be 7-8 people modding the entire board. Then there's no sense of ownership or authority for those sections and no accountability. There's also no way to moderate consistently when you have 4-5 cooks in the kitchen.

And they should have a choice too what they will moderate... putting Vicky back into a section that's made her miserable would be emotionally abusive imo

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

how many points per an infraction?
and when does an infarction expire?

It depends on the offense, we have set infractions like 'insults to other members' which we can just click on or custom infractions for more unique rule breaks.

Insults will typically be between 1-5 points depending on the frequency and severity of it. Multis typically come with hefty infractions and if it's done while someone is already banned, we tend to extend those bans.

I think the most infractions points I've ever given (except for 999 points for Multis) is probably about 10-15? Can't remember what for but it was quite serious.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Withano

Probably about to piss a load of people off, but it seems like a good system to me tbh.
I’d imagine people hate it because some probably have on occaision received a lengthy ban for what looks like something silly, when actually they just have several in-date infractions

That's why we get a lot of complaints tbh, a lot of people think we've chosen to ban them for one thing when it's the system that bans them for going over the threshold.

If people break rules too often, any offense can send them into a ban.