[Vicky.]

I remember when I gave a poster 1 point..and it knocked them into a 3 week ban I was planning on being soft and making it shorter given it really was a minor thing but then they sent me a PM telling me to kill myself. So, nope.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I think when it comes to bans, it's important to remember that bans are dependent on how many points a member has.

I'm going to say something here, I feel like it could lead to an argument but I feel like I need to say it. All the bans from yesterday's drama came from infractions I gave. Niamh and I drew a line in the thread in question after it was cleaned and after seeing the same arguments and attacks were still ongoing after being warned not to, I simply gave everyone that was involved a three point infraction, this was enough to knock some people into a automatic one day ban and for someone else, it was enough to put them over the threshold for a week long ban but not everyone that was infracted got banned because for a few people, it was one of their first offences. I decided to give out those infractions because I wasn't really involved in that argument aside from my name being dragged into it. I gave infractions to people that were opposed to me and people who were arguing for me and all the infractions were because people kept going back to a previously deleted arguments. When I'm modding the thread, the only thing that comes into play is whether or not they are breaking the rules, I'm not tougher on people I dislike and I'm not softer on people I like. Everyone gets the same treatment when I mod.

I say this because I want to give context to the situation and it's a good example of why it feels like some people get banned while others don't. It's all dependant on how many infraction points you have.

The problem here is the inconsistency between the mods in handing out infractions and bans.
Members got infractions by you, several leading to bans for going 'off topic' ---

Niamh had posted:
"Back ontopic please" - that was it, 3 little words which I have never seen leading to infractions if some don't listen immediately - there was none of the usual "listen up now! infractions will be given if people continue to go off topic", which is the way it is normally handled, which gives people a fair chance of taking note and cooling off.
But you have said those words 'Back on topic please' were a WARNING which they were NOT and you handed out 3 point infractions. Why?
I don't believe Niamh or Vicky would have done this, imo, so really its a problem if mods don't have definite guidelines to follow and stick to it, for the sake of fairness, otherwise its going to cause bad feeling.

[Ross.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I remember when I gave a poster 1 point..and it knocked them into a 3 week ban I was planning on being soft and making it shorter given it really was a minor thing but then they sent me a PM telling me to kill myself. So, nope.

Marsh must be stopped!

[Tom4784]

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 someone is behaving noticeably worse then they probably will get a bigger infraction but whether they get banned or not is dependant on their points. The system is based on individual actions and consequences.

Say, if someone reports someone else for baiting in SD and I'm online to read the report thread, I'll go into the topic, look at the post in question and then I tend to go back and forth to understand the context, more often than not I'll find that both sides broke the rules and I infract both, it doesn't matter if you're right or wrong in the argument itself, I have to base it on rule breaks if I want to be impartial.

With all the transphobia stuff in the last CBB, I came up with a rule of thumb. I think it's okay to accuse someone of, in this example, being transphobic as long as you explain why in a reasonable manner IE 'I think you're transphobic because of this and that.' I think that's perfectly fine, the problem occurs if someone goes like 'YOU'RE A TRANSPHOBIC TROUT! GO CHOKE!'. When faced with bigotry, you've got to preferably report or, if you want to discuss, do so in a way that doesn't reduce the discussion to people insulting each other.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by jet

The problem here is the inconsistency between the mods in handing out infractions and bans.
Members got infractions by you, several leading to bans for going 'off topic' ---

Niamh had posted:
"Back ontopic please" - that was it, 3 little words which I have never seen leading to infractions if some don't listen immediately - there was none of the usual "listen up now! infractions will be given if people continue to go off topic", which is the way it is normally handled, which gives people a fair chance of taking note and cooling off.
But you have said those words 'Back on topic please' were a WARNING which they were NOT and you handed out 3 point infractions. Why?
I don't believe Niamh or Vicky would have done this, imo, so really its a problem if mods don't have definite guidelines to follow and stick to it, for the sake of fairness, otherwise its going to cause bad feeling.

It's quite common for mods to hand out infractions when we've spent ages selecting potentially hundreds of posts (INDIVIDUALLY!) to delete them and only for the same argument to occur in the re-opened thread afterwards. Pretty much all the people involved in that argument and who got infracted, bar perhaps Twosugars, have been around long enough to know that you don't continue an argument after it's been deleted. The people who got pushed into a ban certainly do know that.

The fact that the argument was also very intense and insult heavy also played into the points given. I came in into that thread to hand out those infractions about two or three pages after Niamh cleaned it and stated that she had cleaned it and, tbh, three points was probably not enough for some of the things that were said but since I decided to go with continuing a deleted argument as the infraction reason, which everyone was guilty of, that's why I went with a universal three pointer.

Three points isn't really a heavy infraction in all honesty and I personally thought it was a fair amount given how heated the argument had become.

In future, I shall remember to deliver a warning for the benefit of newer members but in the case of members who have been here long enough to know the rules, it should be common knowledge that once an argument is deleted, it should be considered be over or else infractions are dealt out. .

[jet]

When do points accrued expire if you haven't had any for a while?

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by jet

When do points accrued expire if you haven't had any for a while?

Depends on the infractions, Serious infractions tend to have longer expiration dates. A one pointer or a minor infraction might only be active for one month but depending on if the person is a frequent rulebreaker or their offences are particularly bad, they'll get longer lasting infractions that will keep them at a higher number of points for longer which means they need to be on their best behavior for longer.

I think the longest expiration date I've given on a non permaban infraction is a year. Usually the average for most mods is probably around 1-3 months per infraction, I'd say.

[Jordan.]

I still have a warning from 2014 it expires in 2020

[Tom4784]

Bit of a shady warning too!

[Tom4784]

I'll reverse it if you want but if it was me I'd wanna keep it tbh.

[Jordan.]

I'm riding it out & clearly sticking to what it says

[Tom4784]

Imagine if we gave out 6 year infractions and warnings for saying 'Leave ha alone' these days. C&G would be DEAD.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

It's quite common for mods to hand out infractions when we've spent ages selecting potentially hundreds of posts (INDIVIDUALLY!) to delete them and only for the same argument to occur in the re-opened thread afterwards. Pretty much all the people involved in that argument and who got infracted, bar perhaps Twosugars, have been around long enough to know that you don't continue an argument after it's been deleted. The people who got pushed into a ban certainly do know that.

The fact that the argument was also very intense and insult heavy also played into the points given. I came in into that thread to hand out those infractions about two or three pages after Niamh cleaned it and stated that she had cleaned it and, tbh, three points was probably not enough for some of the things that were said but since I decided to go with continuing a deleted argument as the infraction reason, which everyone was guilty of, that's why I went with a universal three pointer.

Three points isn't really a heavy infraction in all honesty and I personally thought it was a fair amount given how heated the argument had become.

In future, I shall remember to deliver a warning for the benefit of newer members but in the case of members who have been here long enough to know the rules, it should be common knowledge that once an argument is deleted, it should be considered be over or else infractions are dealt out. .

Thanks for explaining, but there is another problem...because speaking for myself, I wasn't around to see the whole thread and the numerous insults which you speak of and other members may not have been either. I don't think I insulted anyone, otherwise I would have been given an infraction for that...and I certainly wasn't in any heated argument, if I've totally forgotten then remind me? I pop into a thread when I have time, others may do the same, why is anyone infracted or banned who may not even know posts were deleted - where did it say this had even happened? So giving out infractions or bans to anyone who went off topic after the fact with no real warning isn't fair either...3 points for everyone, regardless?
I've been here a long time and have never had a ban, and to get banned for well, nothing really is annoying...petty on my part really, but still...

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by jet

Thanks for explaining, but there is another problem...because speaking for myself, I wasn't around to see the whole thread and the numerous insults which you speak of and other members may not have been either. I don't think I insulted anyone, otherwise I would have been given an infraction for that...and I certainly wasn't in any heated argument, if I've totally forgotten then remind me? I pop into a thread when I have time, others may do the same, why is anyone infracted or banned who may not even know posts were deleted - where did it say this had even happened? So giving out infractions or bans to anyone who went off topic after the fact with no real warning isn't fair either...3 points for everyone, regardless?
I've been here a long time and have never had a ban, and to get banned for well, nothing really is annoying...petty on my part really, but still...

I can PM you the whys if you want me to go over the infraction with you if you want?

[Cal.]

I have infractions that never expire

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Vicky I would be very happy with you in SD, you are reasonable and erudite, and I think any infractions and bans you hand out are pretty fair, even the ones I have received myself which I know are from you..fair dues I deserved them

This ^

[Kazanne]

I have no problem with the forum or rules at all, it's the way some of us are spoken to ,there are ways of talking to people without being condescending and rude. There should be somewhere we can air our grievances too so I think the appeals section is a good move or even just a named person we could talk to.

[Nicky91]

Originally Posted by Withano

Dear Withano,

You have received an infraction at ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums.

Reason: You implied Georgina wasn’t very rich

i wouldn't abuse my mod powers like that honestly

[AnnieK]

All seems fair to me. Rules and modding needs to be as transparent as possible and what has been suggested seems to be the best way to do things

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by 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

Maru for SD

[Cherie]

I also don't think there would be much of an issue with night time arguments on SD as it is mostly used during the day, I've rarely logged on to a new SD thread made overnight and is is barely posted in late at night

[Ammi]

..I fairly much haven’t really had anything to add to the thread...which might feel odd as I made it....but it’s just because I haven’t been on the forum much to be aware of specific grievances as such and to comment on personally...so it’s really for others to be able to voice things which they feel are contributive atm to so much negativity being felt...anyways one think I thought though...some seems to be the removal or editing of posts without being given a reason for this and the confusions/irritations etc that causes..?...could those edits/removals of specific posts etc be given a ‘one chance’ to the poster who made them to self edit or remove...like, what was ‘wrong’ with this post in terms of being insulting or personal to a member, you tell me..you go look, type thing, you go look at the ‘issue’ here and remove or self edit..?...could that be a possibility maybe...?...


...it may still result in an infraction etc but it may help to stop feelings of ‘bias’ with staff of...’you’re just trying to shut me down’, type thing...and focusing of people taking their own self responsibility..?....also of someone refuses to self edit or remove an obvious personal insult or inference..then the infraction is obvious to all other members as to why it was given as the ‘personal’ post is still there, while that person continues to post in that thread etc...so rather than yep it’s gone or been edited and you’re infracted..it’s more, take a look yourself at the changes/removal/edititing needed or you will be infracted...?...

[Ammi]

...it could be a preset thing to send to a member, rather than type it out each time by staff..?...just press a button and that ‘one chance’ is given to self edit..?...

[Ammi]

...anyways for any staff member to be ‘given’ SD to moderate atm would be like being given the groups or the overs in the XFactor in a series where they were awful acts......I think Niamh and Vicky are both great de-escalators and great diffusers as an active contributing presence in particularly ‘heated’ thread topics...but admin I think would be good to make infraction/sanction decisions overall in that section atm...they just can’t necessarily be here to diffuse etc while the thread is active ...

[Pete.]

I think I speak for many when I say this drama is distracting from the mods installing a like button and quote notification feature