|
Post by argonbalt on Feb 14, 2017 17:03:53 GMT
Well this is pretty straightforward, what form of advanced Moderation do you folk desire? A quick and painless absolute system? An absolute system but with open discussion before hand? or a Light or full democratic process where in things must be voted on?
Obviously the first two solve problems and maintain peace the fastest but are perhaps to heavy handed? The latter are obviously longer more complicated processes but are also more open to the larger forum.
The effects of this survey will be taken into account towards tonight's SPACE COURT hearing in the SHERIFF'S OFFICE thread.
|
|
|
Post by teeth on Feb 14, 2017 18:21:43 GMT
An absolute system where bans can be appealed in a thread specifically for it, banned accounts are normally banned from everywhere except the ban appeal section. If they're clearly just a troll/bot or get further infractions in the ban appeal board, then their account is banned altogether.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Feb 14, 2017 18:29:43 GMT
I just want the moderator to point out why s/he did what s/he did, and people should be able to appeal their ban in either PMs or a ban appeal section
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Feb 14, 2017 18:47:36 GMT
I agree with the current majority.
It should be three strikes then a ban with an appeal system. It works anywhere else it can work here.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Feb 14, 2017 18:48:55 GMT
I do want moderators to give a reason, and if a thread gets to hostile, lock it and say why
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Feb 14, 2017 19:29:15 GMT
Personally I've seen both the first and the second option and the second fits a small community much better.
Open discussion does not mean that the decisions of the mod are debateable. It just gives them more points of view and additional info, for both the mods and the members.
The talk with both parties involved is going to happen anyway first between them and the mod and then if everything is going ok between them.
Punishment does not mean directly ban "forever" and for sure first infractions will be met with temporary bans, giving time for both parties to cool down.
So for me an open discussion in a separate section of the forum, invisible for guests sounds good.
|
|
|
Post by Dhan on Feb 15, 2017 0:19:17 GMT
How about a system of trial by combat? Both parties involved fight to the death and who ever is left standing doesn't get banned. Now that's space court for you.
|
|
|
Post by caiaphas on Feb 15, 2017 0:24:30 GMT
How about a system of trial by combat? Both parties involved fight to the death and who ever is left standing doesn't get banned. Now that's space court for you. Are we talking sabers or one-shot muzzle-loaded pistols?
|
|
|
Post by Dhan on Feb 15, 2017 0:28:46 GMT
How about a system of trial by combat? Both parties involved fight to the death and who ever is left standing doesn't get banned. Now that's space court for you. Are we talking sabers or one-shot muzzle-loaded pistols? Railguns.
|
|
|
Post by caiaphas on Feb 15, 2017 0:32:06 GMT
Are we talking sabers or one-shot muzzle-loaded pistols? Railguns. Ten thousand paces apart, draw and fire?
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Feb 15, 2017 0:41:30 GMT
Ten thousand paces apart, draw and fire? Did you mean stand 100 Km apart, turn the reaction wheels, and sandblast?
|
|
|
Post by bdcarrillo on Feb 15, 2017 1:42:33 GMT
Hard and fast?
|
|
|
Post by newageofpower on Feb 15, 2017 3:33:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by argonbalt on Feb 15, 2017 3:56:02 GMT
Okey doke thanks for the response from a number or forum regulars, if anything should come up in the future the rough course of action will be as follows:
1:Notification
2:Review of claims
3:Judgement
4:Public notice soon there after towards the information of the following three steps
I look forward to keeping this forum as peaceful as possible.
|
|
|
Post by bdcarrillo on Feb 15, 2017 3:57:33 GMT
How is it lewd to ask the mod to run a hard line on infractions in a fast manner? That four step process seems fair and efficent for inter-member grievances.
|
|