The Life Sentence

[Amethyst]

In a city like Reborn... crime never sleeps. And so can't we.

It was a one of those summer nights when the sun set and forgot to take its swelter on with it. We was stewin' in the Main st office and the boys was all pinchin' their bridges tryna stamp out the stench of squalor that wafted up to badger us as if we coulda done something about it. I was consultin' the local desk fan when this broad strolls up to my desk, slams a fistful of documents down onto it, and looks me dead in the eyes.

She says, "We need a lifetime warning point cap on Reborn."

I look up. Her eyes is something fierce. Heavy. The lady means business. I didn't wanna give her none.

I roll my cigar 'tween my finger tips and let dip into the ashtray. 

And you know what I said?

I said

That's the dumbest thing I ever heard.

 

But nowadays, I look back on that night, when I couldn't tell which was stuffier-- the air or that dame. And I think,
Damn, Reborn could really use a lifetime warning point cap.

 

--

This is another post about the community's health and discipline. If that's not interesting to you, skip to the end for the TL;DR.

 

When I talk about a "Lifetime warning point cap," what I mean is a significant change from the current warning/consequence system where warnings can count to a ban no matter how old they are.

 

Right now, a user gets banned from the community if they reach 10 Warning Points at once. This has been a staple since the system was introduced. However, as any of you who have gotten a warning probably know, warning points fall off after a certain amount of time. This was a part of the system that was designed to let those users who would learn from their past mistakes and warnings fully recover from them provided they were on good behavior for such and such time.

 

While this is a very forgiving system and I stand by its benefits, the truth is that unfortunately not every user is responsive to change or guidance, and the current warning structure is pretty notably inefficient at dealing with those cases. For people who's behavior does not improve, we tend to see one of two things happening:

• The user acquires some warning points but then leaves for an extended period of time on their own, coming back months later after the points have expired only to repeat the same thing
• The user hits the 7 WP threshold where they are mute and post-moderated for an extended period of time, but this inability to publicly comment prevents them from ever acquiring the last few points it would take for them to get banned, meaning the behavior repeats once the mute time (and thereby previous points) wear off.

 

That second point in particular means that in most situations, unless a user is either a dickwad in DMs, or does enough dickly things in a short enough period of time that they jump straight from 6-10, it's almost theoretically impossible for a user to be banned under the current system. Indeed, the number of users who have ever reached 10 points to be banned can probably be counted on one's fingers.

 

We've been going back and forth on the point of what to do about the effective inability to ban users for some time now. It's not that we have any particular desire to go off banning folks, but being able to do so at least in practical theory is a useful tool for us to keep the community tidy and kind. One of the solutions we have continually arrived at has been a rule that if a person acquires a certain number of points, expired or not, throughout their lifetime on Reborn, then they could be banned. This would mean that even if somebody is away or muted for long enough that all of their points fall off, we would still have a way to hold them accountable.
For a long time I, and some others were against this kind of system because it put those who made positive changes to their behavior in some kind of jeopardy, or otherwise discouraged making those changes. However, after updating to a more stringent mute policy earlier this year, I've been really encouraged by the positive effects I've seen in the community following them, and I wanted to take action to make sure that these positive changes could last. 

 

So, the change is basically this: 

Whereas a user currently needs 10 active warning points to be banned, in the future a user will need to have gotten 10 non-etiquette warning points at any time in their account's history in order to be banned.

 

Now I'll talk about that "non-etiquette" distinction. Most of the warnings we give out are just etiquette violations. That includes stuff like double posting, posting in the wrong section, off-topic posting, etc. This is normal keep-the-forum-organized stuff that most people, especially those not used to forums, sometimes forget. We aren't tryna hammer anyone for those, and we're also not trying to be too heavy-handed as a community.

So, effective as of this post, all normal etiquette warnings have been changed to 0 points*. Further, past and future etiquette warnings will not contribute to the lifetime cap.

In other words, you can't get banned for double posting or whatever.

* The repeat offense variations, for after someone has already been asked to mind their posts and questions, do still have a 1 point value attached to it as previous. This means you can still get muted if you continue to do things like bump threads a lot or post irrelevant things in topics. However, even the repeat offense warnings don't contribute to the lifetime cap-- that is solely for temporary consequences.

 

In other words, the only things that will contribute to the lifetime cap are things that fall in the realm of actually disrespecting others others or compromising the site's integrity as a community. For a full list of which warnings count as etiquette or otherwise, please see this updated warning list thread.

 

For those of you with pasts more rocky than you might prefer, you might be wondering if you'll suddenly be banned because of how many warnings you have in the past. The answer is a solid no. This lifetime warning policy is manually considered, and we will only consider the total lifetime volume of warnings when an individual acquires a new non-etiquette warning point (also effective after this post.)
This means that even if you have like, 83 old expired points right now, if you never get another one, then you're fine.
please don't get another one.

 

In the end, this change is only likely to expect a small handful of users, but I hope that it enables us to keep this a friendly and welcoming community far into the future. 

--

TL;DR: 

• Users are now banned when reaching 10 lifetime non-etiquette warning points instead of 10 current warning points
• Etiquette warnings have been disarmed to 0 points
• No accounts will be considered for bans regardless of how many points they have, until another warning is received after this post.

 

Thanks for listening. I always hope everyone can stay around for a long time and enjoy the site!

[Wolfox]

While I see the use of this, I also see a great risk. some people, myself included, have had the occasional slip-up and have accumulated a decent number of warning points this way. For me, personally, I have 12 total warnings. mostly posting in the wrong section/needless posting but two for bad language. Would that mean that I have a total of 12 or 2 warning points for this system? Would the next time I have a slight slip-up with language be the instant ban while generally having attempted to at least better myself as a forum user? I believe this system will work well when it does work, but it might take a few too many casualties with it on accident

[Candy]

3 minutes ago, Wolfox said:

While I see the use of this, I also see a great risk. some people, myself included, have had the occasional slip-up and have accumulated a decent number of warning points this way. For me, personally, I have 12 total warnings. mostly posting in the wrong section/needless posting but two for bad language. Would that mean that I have a total of 12 or 2 warning points for this system? Would the next time I have a slight slip-up with language be the instant ban while generally having attempted to at least better myself as a forum user? I believe this system will work well when it does work, but it might take a few too many casualties with it on accident

You have two points Wolfy. You still have eight points. 

Moreover idk if this is the case but I'm inclined to believe that since this ain't the police or the Supreme Court or whatever, negotiations can still occur in the case you get 10 non-etiquette points.

Not like we're Insurgence (sorry this smol candy is a salty taffy again lul)

[Wolfox]

2 minutes ago, Candy said:

You have two points Wolfy. You still have eight points. 

Moreover idk if this is the case but I'm inclined to believe that since this ain't the police or the Supreme Court or whatever, negotiations can still occur in the case you get 10 non-etiquette points.

Not like we're Insurgence (sorry this smol candy is a salty taffy again lul)

alright, thanks for clearing that up (and the Insurgence devs will ban when you give valid criticism over the Game, ame is at least 20 times better than them)

[Chickens]

Is this the e18 release thread

 

dontbanme

Edited June 11, 2018 by Psychic Sheep

[Candy]

32 minutes ago, Sirius said:

Methinks there should be follow up investigations where peeps reach out to users to investigate if sudden irl changes could be behind a rapid stack in WP. Very few peepos are just simple a**holes, or I'd like to think things aren't that cynical. Most falling outs, disagreements and upsets are as a result of misunderstandings, personal struggles etc, and I think that's a really underdiagnosed social epidemic.

Don't get me wrong, I just dread to think of users being punished further on top of personal struggles (or, punished for symptoms of bigger, unrelated problems) EDIT: this is coming from the perspective of knowing this has happened before, and wanting things to be better than that

That's my two cents, but if I'm wrong then I'm wrong 

Might be gud in theory but how could anyone judge irl changes? What are circumstances that should allow for rude behavior? Moreover, the a**holes might mix in and give an irl pretext which may be false but can't be confirmed

Me thinks if one has irl problems to the extent that they can't be civil, they should use their autonomy and better judgment to leave forums/Discord for a while until they can act like they usually would. But again I leave this to those with better judgment than I lul

[ZEL]

25 minutes ago, Sirius said:

Methinks there should be follow up investigations where peeps reach out to users to investigate if sudden irl changes could be behind a rapid stack in WP. Very few peepos are just simple a**holes, or I'd like to think things aren't that cynical. Most falling outs, disagreements and upsets are as a result of misunderstandings, personal struggles etc, and I think that's a really underdiagnosed social epidemic.

I half disagree. Just because someone has a reason for acting like a jerk doesn't mean it makes their actions towards others any more okay. A reason is not an excuse.

I have a personality disorder that makes me emotionally unstable and often aggressive. Doesn't mean I get a lifetime pass on being a dick.

If someone gets one warning point for disrespect/rudeness and it turns out they had a shitty day, sure, that's one thing, but when you get to someone "rapidly" earning themselves a "stack" then it's clearly no longer an exceptional, isolated incident. If someone is in such a bad mood that they repeatedly lash out against others and can't trust themselves to spend time here without acting up so much it gets them actual warning points (which often implies they ignored verbal warnings), then the solution is for them to take a break from here for a while and work through whatever is causing the issues.

Auth can reach out to people to ask if everything's alright with them, but they have to work on changing their tune by themselves in the end.

[Elvenlore]

Thanks for your time and effort in updating these rules.

 

I do struggle to understand and remember things sometimes, so please forgive me if I missed the point or overlooked something which basically says this. If I have, please correct me. But I'd like to make a suggestion, if I may.

 

I think there still ought to be a way for users to redeem themselves after making errors or getting large amounts of points -- some sort of community service that, when completed, takes off a point or two. While I understand that some people may abuse them, we shouldn't let a few rotten apples spoil the opportunity for those who genuinely want to improve or redeem themselves.

 

My idea is that the warnings stay permanently as you've implemented, and don't drop off, but they can be removed through good service. Perhaps a task is completed for the benefit or betterment of the site and the user demonstrates they understand what rule was broken, why it's there, and what the rules surrounding that area are. In that way it's crystal clear they've learned what the rule is that they broke and have less chance of breaking it again. If someone's just here to be a troll, I doubt they'd want to do work just to be able to continue acting disruptively, so that might act as a deterrent.

 

But, perhaps, there's a grace period where, if they break another rule, the completed service is nullified and the lost point is re-added alongside any other points if any new points are earned. I feel that would keep people from abusing the system by completing service and then breaking more rules. And regardless of the outcome, whether the user is banned or forgiven, the site runs smoother as a result of them having completed their task.

 

That's the idea in a nutshell. I'll throw it out there just in case it's something that hasn't been considered. Again, please correct me if I've missed the point. I sometimes do. xD

 

Edit: And @Sirius , I'm not sure that would work. People could just lie in an effort to get out of trouble, and as ZEL said, personal circumstances aren't an excuse for acting up. They could be considered, sure, but how would we know the liars from the people genuinely struggling?

Edited June 11, 2018 by Elvenlore

[Ojama Yellow]

23 minutes ago, Elvenlore said:

Thanks for your time and effort in updating these rules.

 

I do struggle to understand and remember things sometimes, so please forgive me if I missed the point or overlooked something which basically says this. If I have, please correct me. But I'd like to make a suggestion, if I may.

 

I think there still ought to be a way for users to redeem themselves after making errors or getting large amounts of points -- some sort of community service that, when completed, takes off a point or two. While I understand that some people may abuse them, we shouldn't let a few rotten apples spoil the opportunity for those who genuinely want to improve or redeem themselves.

 

My idea is that the warnings stay permanently as you've implemented, and don't drop off, but they can be removed through good service. Perhaps a task is completed for the benefit or betterment of the site and the user demonstrates they understand what rule was broken, why it's there, and what the rules surrounding that area are. In that way it's crystal clear they've learned what the rule is that they broke and have less chance of breaking it again. If someone's just here to be a troll, I doubt they'd want to do work just to be able to continue acting disruptively, so that might act as a deterrent.

 

But, perhaps, there's a grace period where, if they break another rule, the completed service is nullified and the lost point is re-added alongside any other points if any new points are earned. I feel that would keep people from abusing the system by completing service and then breaking more rules. And regardless of the outcome, whether the user is banned or forgiven, the site runs smoother as a result of them having completed their task.

 

That's the idea in a nutshell. I'll throw it out there just in case it's something that hasn't been considered. Again, please correct me if I've missed the point. I sometimes do. xD

 

Edit: And @Sirius , I'm not sure that would work. People could just lie in an effort to get out of trouble, and as ZEL said, personal circumstances aren't an excuse for acting up. They could be considered, sure, but how would we know the liars from the people genuinely struggling?

theres still a difference between racking up 10 points in a year (with the six month mute in between), and gaining ten warning points gradually throughout the span of five years, all because of minor incidents worth one or at most two warning points.

 

id assume auth are able to review this on a case-by-case basis, and if you havent been acting straight unpleasant for about half your stay, I doubt they would do bans for the latter. as ame said, the amount of bans in reborn so far over so many years can probably be counted on ones hand- this new ruling will not make that much of a difference. its mostly a countermeasure to prevent people from cleverly avoiding a ban.

[Dreamy]

I... think this sounds good? A bit more of a lasting effect for repeated offenders is good, but only because of the distinction between the etiquette infringements (because everyone slips up sometimes) and intentional rule-breaks that'll probably negatively affect others. 

 

one little thing I have noticed is that some offenses relate to an account in general, but the report function only exists for specific posts

[Felicity]

Take that ban hammer and 

 

[FairFamily]

I'm not so sure about this. I sure see the benefit of setting up a setting a system that allows for permanently banning people. However I don't see it being implemented with the current  system.

 

The first issue I have is that just as etique based mishaps non-etique mishaps happen as well. Some of the rules aren't clearly specified so people might get permanent warning points because they misinterpreted the rules.

 

Second sometimes people are a bit innattentive and make mistake that involve infracting content. To give two examples: the first is of someone who posted an innocent image which source link redirected to a site containong phonographic advertisements. The second one is of a danganronpa video where one bear is licking the face of another bear. With this video was quoted "Lick me harder, daddy". In both cases the content got removed which I assume was for inappropriate content both caused by inattentiveness.

 

These are both cases that are bound to happen from to time and will result in people racking permanent warning points until they inevitably reach the ban hammer even though the person just made some mistakes.

 

Also I feel from the examples and the implemented system that you are using a cannon to shoot a fly: a mismatch between solution and problem. The system punishes single infractions while your examples clearly indicate multiple infractions. So why not simply build a system based on how many times a person racks up multiple warning points?

Something like: 

-if you build up 7 warning points 2 times in a year (365 day time period) or 3 times 5 warning points in a year you get banned.

 

 

 

[Commander]

4 hours ago, Morshu said:

theres still a difference between racking up 10 points in a year (with the six month mute in between), and gaining ten warning points gradually throughout the span of five years, all because of minor incidents worth one or at most two warning points.

The only people who have been here that long who would even come close to that many warning points did things intentionally to deserve them. Also, people just don't get banned for racking up 10 points like you said, but it's a push to decide or not. I mean a ban really only happens once every 2 years or something to a user. Most users aren't even around that long so...I don't see the reason to even show paranoia.

 

2 hours ago, FairFamily said:

The first issue I have is that just as etique based mishaps non-etique mishaps happen as well. Some of the rules aren't clearly specified so people might get permanent warning points because they misinterpreted the rules.

 

Second sometimes people are a bit innattentive and make mistake that involve infracting content. To give two examples: the first is of someone who posted an innocent image which source link redirected to a site containong phonographic advertisements. The second one is of a danganronpa video where one bear is licking the face of another bear. With this video was quoted "Lick me harder, daddy". In both cases the content got removed which I assume was for inappropriate content both caused by inattentiveness.

Most of the mods take loose interpretations of the rules and you really only get warning points if you choose to ignore the mods. If you speak Spanish randomly on the server a mod isn't going to find you and automatically give you a warning point but if you don't stop it after being asked...you probably will. Also if you say something sexual or make a joke about a period you probably won't get a warning point but if you direct it at a specific person or post a pic of porn...you probably will. Though I probably shouldn't be talking about how to bend the rules in a topic about following them. Listening to the auth and respecting other users will pretty much make sure you reach.

 

As for the second thing, I absolutely agree. We should also exclude people who call others or things "cancer" or "retarded" while we're at it. Maybe you could excuse it once for a person just being careless but there's a fine line between accident and not trying to avoid it. The Daganronpa thing probably would only get a warning since that's a very popular game and an easy mistake but the pic...how? Most pics are loaded on either the site or discord so they'd know what they're linking ahead of time. And yes, I'm very aware of the image hosting sites that allow nsfw content even though it's not their focus. And if you really can't control yourself in a community, I do question how you'd function in the real world since these rules are basically bare bone requirements for most jobs. I'd also say if you can't show some control then you should be banned. But a single case won't get you banned or in a frying pan right away as things happen.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Personally, I'm all for the change as I've said some of the systems have been way too lenient. The rules and systems have been implemented purely with the aim for the majority to find enjoyment around here over punishing people for the sake of punishing. A stricter warning points system also means people will be willing to learn a bit faster on what they can't do and start behaving more. And for those worried, you have to really try to get banned around here and you'll know well in advanced if you're on your way there. Other than that, nothing has changed at all.

[mde2001]

7 hours ago, DreamblitzX said:

one little thing I have noticed is that some offenses relate to an account in general, but the report function only exists for specific posts

For server related issues, generally the best way to let us know is by messaging a discord moderator/ admin with screenshots of the offending section. If you're trying to report a forum user whose behaviour has been toxic, just pick one example and feel free to leave links to the others within your post. Its quite intentional that you need to leave a post, as in the end we do need a solid example to warn for. While a warning can be taking more than one post into consideration we still need it to start somewhere. I'm sure there used to be a way to report accounts, but I think we got rid of it. So if the issue is something on the profile, just pick their most recent post and put the fact that you're warning about the profile in the text and we'll keep that in mind. 

[FairFamily]

1 hour ago, Commander said:

Also if you say something sexual or make a joke about a period you probably won't get a warning point

Fun fact, I actually got a warning point for that, don't know how long it lasted, pretty long though. 

 

1 hour ago, Commander said:

but the pic...how? Most pics are loaded on either the site or discord so they'd know what they're linking ahead of time. And yes, I'm very aware of the image hosting sites that allow nsfw content even though it's not their focus.

I don't know like I said the image was fine even on the source site. It's just that I could click on the link ofthe image which directed to the site of picture. That site had on top of the picture, pornographic advertisement  maybe the person took a link from a site that post images based on links as well, maybe he had a good add blocker.

[Arkhi]

This is a step in the right direction. I think there's enough opinions in this thread that one more might not be unnecessary, so I'll leave it at that.

[Tacos]

Probably unnecessary for me to inject my opinion at this point, but I think this is a good step in the right direction.  I like the idea of etiquette warnings being reduced to 0 points.  I can’t even count how many times I had to painfully give someone a warning point for being new and unfamiliar with the rules on something so simple as a double or necro post.  Removing points from first time offenses and keeping points on repeat offenses sounds like the way to go.  And yea, I definitely remember the frustration of how mute and mod review made it hard for the very rare few users who were clearly deserving of a ban to get the last point or two for the ban, so this change is very nice to see.  Good work team!

[Jelly]

thanks goodness this isnt being done retroactively