A suggestion to deal with the mod vs user rift.

It is a simple idea which the coding on the site may allow for. I have seen it on a couple of boards and they seem to have the same base code wordforge has.

This is not a rep system, it is a warning system. You basically get points for infractions. You get enough points and you trip an automatic temp ban. The points fade after a certain period of time.

This allows for a few things. It lets the user see that they are getting hot headed and have a line that they can personally back away from. It allows them to make a mistake every so often and it adds a separate level of warning between ban and wagging the finger at people

It would also allow people to make a case for themselves before a ban occurs. So if you think a mod is being unfair with an infraction you can take up the case, probably in its own forum with open speech rules, and maybe get the points overturned. One of the things I saw happen in the past few days was the banhammer was used a bit too forcefully because it was the only thing available.

This is how one of the systems worked that I have seen.

Users report posts that may be worth warning points.
A group, normally the mods, decides what posts get an infraction. The mods can pick their own posts and should look at the user reports. The place I saw it at had a second mod approve the infraction and then it was put onto the account.

A system is set up for specific infractions and the points they get. A person posts dick pics on the board and they get a certain number of points. If they post a racist rant they get a certain number of points. If they spam post call out threads to a certain threshold they get points. You can vary the points based on severity. So if someone doxes someone else that might be a ten or twenty point infraction while if someone goes on a hot headed rant and uses some racist terms you might give them a five point infraction.

Then you have your thresholds. Points stay active for one month. If you get to ten points you get a week vacation. If you get to twenty you get a month to cool down and think about whether or not you need to be posting in this group. Thirty points and you get permabanned.

You can tweak that as you want.

I think we either have that now or have had it in the past.

Ban @Tererun you say? I say OK!

We had it. The current mods stopped using it for whatever reason. I think it was three warnings and a then a ban.

I actually said the other day that the ban regime needs to be structured for the same reason there should be discussion over new rules. A proper warning and ban system would put all members on notice. This arbitrary scattershot banning that we have seen recently has done as much to damage confidence as choices like the Violet Room.

@Mrs. Albert is right. That system already exists and is in place.

Bull. If it were in place then none of the recent bannings would have occurred without explicit, registered warnings. None of that took place.

The system is in place.

Oh, so we're back to this again huh? Just ignoring what is said and repeating the same sentence as if the other person is a fool?

Ok, whatever.

What we seem to be "back to," in truth we never left, is "this is what happened." "I DON'T BELIEVE YOU! LIES ALL LIES!" "No, this is what happened." "QUIT REPEATING YOUR LIES!"

You are desperate to believe I'm out to deceive you. I'm not. Not that you'll believe that, either.

No, I think it's obvious that my comment was posing the question of why the system wasn't used during the recent clusterfuck if you say it is place. If you're going to assert there is a system in place, but you've just come off the back of an episode where you didn't even bother to operate it, then the comment seems a little disingenuous. Probably best not to make the claim in the first place.

The system can be bypassed when necessary, which should be quite obvious. Still, the system already exists and has been running. Your call of "bull" was just that. Like it or not, I didn't lie when I told you that.

John is inartfully trying to say that the system is in place but eliteforge doesn't use it.

Chup does have a point, that sort of system is not in place. It seems to me that you basically build up enough karma and some mod bans you. I am going to have to go with chup on this one that it really does blur the lines completely and it will always cause people to imagine the worst with the mods. What is going on now seems to be exacerbated by the fact people don't know how you are doing this shit.

One of the reasons I am not so hot headed is because I grew to trust that @Anna was a decent moderator. That took time and experience for me to know what she was saying is true. It was for a long time in my perspective.

I guess that when someone goes on a tirade you pm the person and ask them to calm down . That is invisible to the people out here. We see none of that. Shelter releases are only going to be drama and that is going to anger people. I have experience on many boards, and you know I can make myself visible real fast on entering a new one. This sort of thing is common, and the mods here may be overly sensitive to the bullshit. That is to be expected because mods are people who get sick and tired of things. You are not going to stop that because it is in our nature.

What I am suggesting is not implemented here. That is not to say there is not a system here. I am just saying your present system is broken and you cannot get it back because of feelings. Giving people a system to make their case or cool off more public and open would enhance the feelings of attachment to the board. It might actually encourage more robust posting from the people here knowing they can cool off before they get banned. It takes some of the blame off the moderators and puts it back on the users because you can point to an overwhelming fuckhead and say they were unreasonable because they had a chance and made their case.

You can still have permaban triggers in place for things like doxing.

There is an automatic moderation system that is in place. Regardless of anything else you might believe or disbelieve, there is an automatic moderation queue. It has been functioning since Wordforge started using Xenforo.

The rest isn't up to me. Actually, none of it is up to me anymore. The thing is, the system works almost exactly like you described. The key here is that a Moderator, or Admin, can intervene if they find the offense is severe enough to warrant it. That's how it works on almost every board I've ever visited. Hell, go over to TBBS and use the 'N' word there, and watch how fast that user gets tossed out on their ass, without preamble. Some offenses merit immediate ban, whether permanent or temporary. The system works the same way it has been for years. Now it's just in the spotlight because some posters have decided that they'd rather tilt at windmills. Ramen was justifiably tossed on his ass. I think Volpone was also justifiably tossed on his ass. I definitely think gturner was justifiably tossed on his ass. Agree or disagree, but these three decided the rules didn't matter, they decided that the basic understanding of "don't be an asshole" didn't matter, and they paid for it. Chup's lawyering, Dinner's screeching, and Paladin's leaving doesn't change that. The only one I feel bad about, in fact, is that Paladin chose to leave, but it was his choice and he made it.

Yeah, and thanks a bunch for contributing to one of the few voices of reason leaving, I'm sure everyone is grateful to you for that.

His choice. You stayed, and I'm sure everyone is grateful for that.

Yes, and you contributed to that.

Yes, and you contributed to that, too.

I think that system was dismantled way before us. After traffic dropped off in the 2010s and more of us mellowed out, there just wasn't a reason to use it anymore.

You're welcome.

@John, I need some help on this question of automated bans based on accumulation of warning points. It seems like an okay idea, but what are the technical aspects? I did not actually know that we had that system, and kind of felt as a consequence that warnings were fairly meaningless. Can you provide more details?

Ok, but is it possible to make it visible to the regular users. It is just not visible from this end, and I have seen it implemented in other places where it is visible. It may be the software does not allow it. I am not saying take away any bans or mod powers. I just think if you are going to rely on people to self moderate you have to make the boundaries clearly visible, and what is going on here is not visible to the people using the board.

For example I do not know what volpone posted to get a vacation. I do not know if he was warned or given an opportunity to stop. I don't know that he was kicked due to mods not liking him. I cannot see what is going on. However if I know everyone can see a list of their warnings and points and what exact post got flagged then I can relax knowing volpone knew the rules and where he was and he got himself booted. I don't know volpone knew any of that now, and I recognize he has been around for a while and knows the rules.

Maybe it is the case we already have access to see our infractions and maybe we just need to be pointed in the right direction to get that information. It might very well be a case of ignorance.

I know the system exists, but when was the last time it was used? I could be wildly wrong on this, but I think the current practice has existed since before the current Horsepeople, and probably before the Horseperson system existed at all.

It's just the basic warning system that is on by default when installing Xenforo. I wasn't the one who installed the software, though.

There is an add-on out there that will let you see your own warnings, but other than the ban list above, there isn't a lot for this version of Xenforo. Hell, the board software I use on my own board is more than 7 years old in implementation, and from day one users could see their own warnings. Have I said I don't like Xenforo? I don't like it.

It's used any time someone gets a warning. When the user hits the preset number of warnings in a specific time period (in this case one month), they trip the ban system for X number of days. That is the default warning system.

System exists. Volpone had 2 active warnings already. Not sure about gturner or Ramen.

Ok, so software sucks. I cannot argue with that. Thank you for letting us know, and I had an idea about what goes on with the back end but it was not clear to everyone. When things just happen and then people in the group do not see what goes on they start being paranoid and often think the worst.

So if software cannot accomplish the goal perhaps we can come up with a system that allows people to give their input in a more official and visible fashion. Just having things thrashed out in the red room and having a shelter release after the fact does not seem to be working. I think that may just be natural and no one's fault.

Perhaps since some people like to be rule lawyers you could make a room where bannings would be presented and debated for a period of time. Perhaps the software allows for a limited access state for the person who has violated enough to where there is an open forum for intelligent debate about what is going on.

I will use volpone for example. (I may be wrong about who it was, but see the point)

So volpone posts a picture of a black lady hanging. I saw the picture. It is seen by the mods and it trips the software ban by whatever process that is. I am pretty sure that immediate ban could allow for volpone to have access to the court room and just his specific thread there. He can then make his case that he is going to cool off or perhaps say how the ban was unfair. The mods could put up the evidence of what went on. In this case the picture would be moved to the court thread where people who are interested in making a statement about it can do so. Also the severity of the infraction can be argued so as to apply a more customised punishment. In the case of flashlight losing the ability to rep people's postings could have been presented with the overwhelming number of reps given and reasonable people could see why it happened, and also have their voices heard.

If it is a concern that someone is going to spam the argument up with meaningless drivel you could make it so certain court room mods approve postings in the room.

It may seem complicated, but we are not dealing with a huge number of bannings. It would be like moving the shelter to a more public forum, and you could still keep the shelter as it is.

Martin Luther king noted in newsletters from a Birmingham prison that people need to have an outlet for their protests that they feel gets heard. If you do not have that outlet people turn to more extreme ways of getting noticed. The application at the time was the civil rights movement, but it is a philosophy that can be applied in many places.

Unless I missed it, there is no discussion here or in FAQ about warning thresholds. I think this is what people are asking about.

Also FAQ needs update to remove reference to the VR.

That's coming with any other updates we agree on shortly.

Thought about something similar. I think I'd make a pretty good Justice of the SCOWF.


It is, however, the case that WF is a benevolent dictatorship, and that's not to be forgotten.

The warning matrix used to be publicly posted years ago.