Suggestion Discipline

[SC_Hoaty]

The TOS currently discuss 2 types of penalties for folks who infract the rules. These are the 5 day ban and the permanent ban.

On another, non-scuba-related, forum that I recently joined, they have a different system. There are points associated with various infractions, and they expire after a stated amount of time. Too many points in too short a time earns you a temporary ban. The number of points determines the length of the ban.

If this is of interest to the mods and advisors, I can provide the details.

 

[SC_Hoaty]

This option is already available, and has been for a few years now. We've just chosen not to use it.

We rarely ban anyone except spammers. When someone is banned, usually it's because they've been warned several times.

*edit*


I just noticed this thread is in reference to a specific incident, which I wasn't commenting on.

This response is general statement on the forum capabilities and the "infraction" system that is part of vBulletin .

Thanks Howard.

If SB is going to use bans of varying length, shouldn't the TOS address those? Recent actions seem to contradict the TOS - making it look like rules are made up as someone see fit. My personal experience is that most of the staff is sincere in wanting what is best for the community - so having the discipline process more transparent would benefit all.

 

[Quero]

Maybe some examples might help, Steve

Here are a few:<snip>

Isn't there also something like this?

Super moderators are bestowed with the additional ability to give you "custom" infractions. Think of this as a tailor made holiday fit to your specific requirements.

There have been quite a few insightful comments in this discussion, among which the point that it would take an accountant to keep track of the points, expirations, etc., and additionally that there's a certain amount of interpretation, both of the intent and effect of the offending post as well as in the severity of the sanction each offence merits. This happens everywhere, all the way up through governmental judicial systems, so there's no way anyone can expect an entirely objective application of the disciplinary measures employed in any such point system.

Even so, here on SB we do try to take into account many factors, notably including recidivism, which will always carry with it one of those "custom" vacations. Because we so rarely impose bans, it just happens that custom vacations are the norm when we deem that a time-out for reflection is needed. When a member is awarded a temp ban, it's usually because s/he's crossed the line repeatedly after warnings and milder sanctions and for whatever reason continues to push the envelope. In extremely rare instances (other than spam), an offense is so blatant that it merits an immediate and permanent ban without any warnings. If a member gets repeated warnings (generally in the form of removed posts with stern explanations), followed by a temp ban of some duration, it's an indication that we value the member in the community and really hope s/he will correct his/her posting behaviour. It's a kind of tough love.

 

[SC_Hoaty]

Isn't there also something like this?
There have been quite a few insightful comments in this discussion, among which the point that it would take an accountant to keep track of the points, expirations, etc., and additionally that there's a certain amount of interpretation, both of the intent and effect of the offending post as well as in the severity of the sanction each offence merits. This happens everywhere, all the way up through governmental judicial systems, so there's no way anyone can expect an entirely objective application of the disciplinary measures employed in any such point system.

Even so, here on SB we do try to take into account many factors, notably including recidivism, which will always carry with it one of those "custom" vacations. Because we so rarely impose bans, it just happens that custom vacations are the norm. When a member is awarded a temp ban, it's usually because s/he's crossed the line repeatedly after warnings and milder sanctions and for whatever reason continues to push the envelope. In extremely rare instances (other than spam), an offense is so blatant that it merits an immediate and permanent ban without any warnings. If a member gets repeated warnings (generally in the form of removed posts with stern explanations), followed by a temp ban of some duration, it's an indication that we really hope the member will correct his/her posting behavior. It's a kind of tough love.

Here is what the SB TOS say:

Temporary bans (5 days) can be called for by any Moderator and are automatic. This can be in response to any violation of the TOS (Moderator&#8217;s discretion), harassment of others, flaming others, or trolling. The Moderator must send a notice (even though an Advisor has to flip the switch) to the affected member&#8217;s e-mail and detail why the suspension was initiated. These should be rare and can be conditional.

Permanent Bans are considered when the member exceeds 2 suspensions in less than 6 months, openly challenges authority (not just asking a question), threatens anyone in any way, or has blatantly violated the TOS. A permanent ban requires 8 Moderator&#8217;s approvals or a 2/3s majority of the Moderators voting, which ever is more. A temporary ban should be called for first and then permanent banning should be discussed for at least 5 days. The Moderator who initiated the temporary ban is in charge of the process. They will also set the time for a vote (at least 5 days) and send the appropriate message if so needed. These should be very rare and can be conditional.

Under no circumstances will Scubaboard Moderators or Advisors disclose reasons or rationale for any disciplinary action to a third party. We view this as a privacy issue and are committed to protect the privacy of the board's members at all times. While we do respect a member's desire to request a review of the status of their account, we specifically forbid the use of sock puppets (multiple user accounts) or another member's account to make your case. All such requests must be sent to support@scubaboard.com for consideration. At this point of the process, we will not feel obliged to correspond any further unless we change your status. All Moderators and Advisors will forward any and all such requests sent to them personally as well.

Permanent bans can be re-visited by any Moderator at any time and only need a simple majority of the Moderators voting to be rescinded.

Nothing about custom vacations. Play by the rules.

---------- Post Merged at 12:43 AM ---------- Previous Post was at 12:41 AM ----------

And on the other site, No, there is nothing about "Super Moderators." They also play by the rules.

 

[HowardE]

Thanks Howard.

If SB is going to use bans of varying length, shouldn't the TOS address those?

Not really. The TOS is not the local ordinance, nor is the TOS to be a menu of crime = punishment. The TOS is a variable that is interpreted by the moderators, and the final say is up to Advisors, myself, and Pete.

Discipline is again rarely enforced. Only a small handful of disciplinary bans are handed out at all during a year, and only another smaller handful of members are banned pertinently.

If we made a
"If you circumvent the language filter" that's a demerit.
"Call someone a troll" that's two demerits
"Make fun of someone's trim" one demerit.
"Dogpile on _____ " three demerits, etc... then what? Would people pick and choose how bad they could be and push that envelope too? Do we want automatic bans for people who have been "naughty"? We don't in general think that members are that juvenile, or need that much structure. Therefore, the "automatic ban" is not our SOP, even though the TOS uses language like, "Automatic Ban." This language is so that if we DO do that (I said do-do), then we're "covered."

The TOS is purposefully somewhat vague, so that we can interpret each case individually. That is part of Pete's vision for SB since he acquired the site in 2001.

If you look at the TOS, which you highlighted the banning process... You'll notice that it's much more harsh than we really are at all. Rarely is someone "automatically" banned for any of the reasons listed, except for non-scuba spammers. We even give scuba spammers a chance to change their tune. We are extremely liberal with the policy that is posted.

In general. As I stated earlier... Bans are rarely handed out, and also in general, there may be a long ad nauseam discussion about whether or not the individual should be banned. Sometimes also, there isn't.

Needless to say... More policy isn't going to be the answer here on SB. We like the TOS, and have refined it and revised it once or twice over the years to reflect our vision for our fair city.

With that said... and as I said before, we will not use the infraction system on members. It doesn't fit our model.

As for "Playing by the rules" - The TOS clearly states this:

"No post should exceed a "PG" rating (link). Profane, racial, insulting or mean spirited language is simply not allowed here and this includes any sort of harassment or cyber bullying."

Shouldn't those be the rules that people are complaining aren't being followed? By far, the complaints I hear from the "guy on the street" is that there's a lot of mean people on SB. They beat up on people, gang up, criticize, etc. If anything, we should more strictly enforce the niceness rules... But really, everything is mostly in balance and we try to give people latitude, because in the end, SB is about fun.

If you're concerned about someone getting an unprecedented two week ban, maybe it's because they're repeatedly walking the thin line of what's acceptable and what's not? With that said... The abuse or appeals email hasn't received anything (according to the keeper of those email addresses) so apparently, your friend who was banned didn't have anything to say about it?

I don't really know any of the details of your friend's ban, as I haven't been following it. I have a lot of DEMA preparation to do for my two seminars, and I've also been working with scuba students..

Maybe users shouldn't dive so close to the no decompression limits? When we push the limits... we sometimes take a hit.

 

[SC_Hoaty]

Howard -

Thank you for your thoughtful and explanatory post.

Further discussion of this would be counterproductive. Can you please lock this thread?

Thank you.

 

[HowardE]

Howard -

Thank you for your thoughtful and explanatory post.

Further discussion of this would be counterproductive. Can you please lock this thread?

Thank you.

As you wish.

:dancinglock: