Forthcoming changes on Bans & Moderations

[Martyn]

I think this is an great idea, and quite well thought out. Hopefully, it will inspire others to behave and stop the constant asking in threads which I have noticed recently of "why has member x been banned?".

I love the way Neowin is continuing to try and improve all the time. Keep it up (Y)

Lol I have 100% though... man, and it was only because of signature violations and calling some guy an idiot and flame-baiting. So I mean, it wasn't anything too bad. Hopefully people won't change their perspective on me (or other such members) through this display of warnings.

I like your sig by the way :p

[4CxbqFxVnstmA Veteran]

Changes I would like to see to the rating system to prevent abuse:

1. You cannot rate your own thread.

2. A thread rating is not visible until at least 2 people rate it. (A single member's rating cannot be representative of the average opinion.)

Those are both cool ideas. I think, though, I'd like to see the rating not visible until at least 3 or even 5 people rate it. It seems to me a lot of thread rates with 2 people are one giving it a 1 and the other giving it a 5. Another idea that might make those rating more useful more quickly is to show the actual number of raters who have rated the thread right next to the number of stars. I know you can see this if you click on the down arrow once you've opened the thread but if the actual number of raters could show up along with the stars in the active posts listings, then people would know more without having to open the thread.

[Lt-DavidW]

Those are both cool ideas. I think, though, I'd like to see the rating not visible until at least 3 or even 5 people rate it.

The problem with this is thread ratings are quite rare as they are, and almost no threads except the extremely popular ones have 3 or 5+ ratings. But who knows, perhaps rating threads will become a more popular habit amongst members as they discover this feature.

[XerXis]

Sounds like a great improvement. Hopefully the additional information that will be shown about bans will help to avoid situations like the 'snypergate' scandal.

also, showing 40%< bans publicly should persuade those with such warning to keep their nose clean.

will the reduction period remain at 6 months?

/note to self, trademark the words 'snypergate'

i still don't know what happened to snyper, more openness (does that word exist? :p) is a welcome and necessary change. Glad that neowin decides to follow some of the rules of a democracy :D

[shakey_snake]

These changes should be interesting. I haven't been here long enough to notice any sort of changes in the atmosphere that people on occasion claim has happened, but I'm sure these changes to allow us to see more of the moderation process come as a result of all the "lets moderate the mods" suggestions from This thread.

I'm certainly pleased to see that the higher-ups here are this considerate towards the membership's wishes and to be honest, this has kind of pushed my hand to part with $15 and subscribe. (Y) (Y)

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

And now for a completely unrelated discussion :rolleyes::

Dude, you're the only person I know who cares about thread ratings.

Incorrect as well, if I really was, others wouldn't have spoken up about the issue of topic rating in the GH either. They have many times.

Maybe he should have said that you are the only one who derails threads about other unrelated things into discussions about thread ratings.

I opened this thread this morning, hoping to read a thread about "forthcoming changes on bans & moderations" only to find half of the 200 posts are about thread ratings.

I mean honestly, I've never rated any thread with one star just because of the thread starter and certainly don't have any kind of vendetta against you, but I can certainly see by your behavior in this thread how someone might have a beef with you.

[Rappy Veteran]

It's funny as hell that even a thread specifically about moderation gets completely off topic.

It's Neowin we can chat about one subject and it will always go in a different direction!

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

These changes should be interesting. I haven't been here long enough to notice any sort of changes in the atmosphere that people on occasion claim has happened, but I'm sure these changes to allow us to see more of the moderation process come as a result of all the "lets moderate the mods" suggestions from This thread.

I'm certainly pleased to see that the higher-ups here are this considerate towards the membership's wishes and to be honest, this has kind of pushed my hand to part with $15 and subscribe. (Y) (Y)

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

And now for a completely unrelated discussion :rolleyes::

Incorrect as well, if I really was, others wouldn't have spoken up about the issue of topic rating in the GH either. They have many times.

Maybe he should have said that you are the only one who derails threads about other unrelated things into discussions about thread ratings.

I opened this thread this morning, hoping to read a thread about "forthcoming changes on bans & moderations" only to find half of the 200 posts are about thread ratings.

I mean honestly, I've never rated any thread with one star just because of the thread starter and certainly don't have any kind of vendetta against you, but I can certainly see by your behavior in this thread how someone might have a beef with you.

....

My issue relates to moderation and the warning system and in a topic where the moderators are talking about change I merely raised my point.

It's clearly something that people want to have a say on as half of the "200" posts you talk about, being "100", "half" of them aren't even posted by me.

They (admins/mods) seem to have had no problem with the point on ratings being raised, and from it we've had what I can see as a good number of suggestions from the community on how to tackle the rating system.

I'm not the only one to make the moderators aware of the system being abused in this topic.

How is that worthless and "derailing"?

I'm 100% sure as the leaders of a community they would rather hear respectful issues raised by members even at the sake of a topic going slightly offtopic, than let us all continue to surf on Neowin and try to take things into our own hands.

I can certainly see by your behavior in this thread how someone might have a beef with you.

I'd be saddened to see someone upset/have a beef with me over my input in this thread....

:hmmm:

[Lt-DavidW]

It's Neowin we can chat about one subject and it will always go in a different direction!

It's the only place where a discussion on using the term "mum and dad" in schools can turn into a debate about God's morality.

I love this place! :D

[Daniel F. Administrators]

it will be interesting to see what people think after the changes are made and they re-read this thread. I've just read it from start-to-finish and I must say I've taken notice (first time in a long time) of the warn % while reading.

I find it most enlightening it reallyh helps with the convo. I'm not sayingg that all 60+ warn - members posts were iqnored but i did give more time to the posters who had 0% and they are able to do that without feeling the need to make a big deal out of it.

p.s. yes the 1star issue is not right, we cant condone what seems to be tantermount to bulling tacktics. Neowin has never condoned this sort of behaviour.

besides this is less than i suggested, I would have been much harder but im to clinical. Steve feels for the whole community - good & bad. He's the best mate any member could have on here. He will defend youthe membershipto the hilt, even when frankly some members havn't deserved it.

now im not saying everything Steve does is wonderful, he is afterall only a regular bloke. But after 7 years of working here I can say he is damn good at what he does.

I do agree we sometimes have the odd problem moderator and they are usually just as much of a problem for us as you. Its in our interests that the community runs as smooth as possible, that way we do less work ;) So they usually arnt around very long. And I can say atm we dont have any problem mods that I can persoanlly say I've seen or had to deal with.

Myself & Steve spent along time personally coming up & writing the Mods Charter & Guideline's & structures which every mod has to sign upto. We constantly monitor the rules and the mods to make sure everything runs smooth. Im not sure I know any other forum that has such a ridged sytem ccovers both mods and memners.

Dan

[Colin-uk Veteran]

Those are both cool ideas. I think, though, I'd like to see the rating not visible until at least 3 or even 5 people rate it.

IIRC, it used to be set to only show until 5 people had rated it, but hardly anyone ever rated a thread, once it was reduced to 1 vote, a lot more of the threads started to recieve ratings.

[Cormier6083]

Just my opinion, but maybe 20% should get their warning badge displayed as well.

Sorry if I'm just reiterating, but I can't read through 14 pages.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

IIRC, it used to be set to only show until 5 people had rated it, but hardly anyone ever rated a thread, once it was reduced to 1 vote, a lot more of the threads started to recieve ratings.

Can it be set independently for each forum on the board?

For example in media/movie ratings 1 vote triggers it to appear, but in the GH 3-5 votes are required for a rating to appear?

Yeah that won't catch the culprits who troll and 1-star vote, but it at least visually makes the forum look tidier/better for those posting - As I suspect in the majority of cases it's a small minority, if not even 1 or 2 people who are 1-star voting everything.

Edited February 9, 2008 by Audioboxer

[Colin-uk Veteran]

Can it be set independently for each forum on the board?

For example in media/movie ratings 1 vote triggers it to appear, but in the GH 3-5 votes are required for a rating to appear?

Yeah that won't catch the culprits who troll and 1-star vote, but it at least visually makes the forum look tidier/better for those posting.

possibly, but im not sure, dont have access to that stuff :p

[Septimus]

Man this place is pretentious. Pretty funny actually.

[Japlabot]

We aren't worried about those members on 80% or 100% getting a freebie because generally those members will always screw up.

I used to be on 80%, I'm now on 0%. I don't think that it's fair to assume that members that do a few too many minor stuffups are always going to screw up.

I think that this whole public shaming business is not the right way to go about maintaining rules. I don't see a problem with the current system to be honest where if you break a rule, you get a warning until you are banned. Why do I care what happens to someone else? All that we're going to get are members that are displaying their warning proudly, they might even go as far as make one of those signatures where instead of says "Username -Moderator" or "Username -Subscriber", it will say "Username -100% warning"

[insanekiwi]

I used to be on 80%, I'm now on 0%. I don't think that it's fair to assume that members that do a few too many minor stuffups are always going to screw up.

I think that this whole public shaming business is not the right way to go about maintaining rules. I don't see a problem with the current system to be honest where if you break a rule, you get a warning until you are banned.

exactly my thoughts. to be honest it happened to me aswell :cool:

[Rappy Veteran]

Just my opinion, but maybe 20% should get their warning badge displayed as well.

Sorry if I'm just reiterating, but I can't read through 14 pages.

Why? whats your reason for that?...I think it would be wrong because it might be people who have just made one mistake, I know because I have 20% warn but that being on display wouldnt make me angry but it just seems wrong to display people who may of made just one mistake.

[Cormier6083]

I used to be on 80%, I'm now on 0%. I don't think that it's fair to assume that members that do a few too many minor stuffups are always going to screw up.

I think that this whole public shaming business is not the right way to go about maintaining rules.

True, random "Zomg my warn be showin" threads will pop up like hot cakes.

Why? whats your reason for that?...I think it would be wrong because it might be people who have just made one mistake, I know because I have 20% warn but that being on display wouldnt make me angry but it just seems wrong to display people who may of made just one mistake.

Well, I think if you are going to do this whole "embarrassment" thing, everyone should be included. I mean, that way, 20% will even seem like a bad thing (not calling you bad :p) and people will be discouraged from posting before they think or whatever they did to get that.

[Panacik]

Idiot.

Hold on, so you get to be rude to people and call them idiots, but members cant? Thats not very fair now is it?

[shakey_snake]

Who said dictatorships like internet forums are completely fair?

Idiot. :p

[Farstrider]

Come now Rich, the man apologised and the "issue" has been slightly flogged already, me being one of them! He is still practicing self-flagellation using an instrument called a "discipline", a cattail whip made of light chains with small spikes or hooks on the end! :laugh:

[Andrew Lyle Global Moderator]

I guess the worst thing about the ratings system is that we can't see who rated what, so we can't see which member is constantly voting Audioboxers threads 1 star. Maybe it's possible at db level, I'll ask Davelegg.

It should be. When I go to re-rate a thread, or rate it for the first time, it knows what I last rated it at, and it allows me to update my vote. There must be some record (even in txt format) that shows the username or number, thread number, and rating they gave. I fear it could all be encrypted. But something so small shouldn't

Myself & Steve spent along time personally coming up & writing the Mods Charter & Guideline's & structures which every mod has to sign upto. We constantly monitor the rules and the mods to make sure everything runs smooth. Im not sure I know any other forum that has such a ridged sytem ccovers both mods and memners.

Dan

Your the only forum that I know of that has created guidelines for it's mods, rather then the quick chat over Messenger saying "just mod the place", where people abuse the power, and attempt to be power hungry infront of other members. A charter & guidelines helps inforce these rules about being a mod, so the community doesn't turn into chaos. I will be the first to say, thank you for doing so.

Edited February 9, 2008 by lylesback2

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

It should be. When I go to re-rate a thread, or rate it for the first time, it knows what I last rated it at, and it allows me to update my vote. There must be some record (even in txt format) that shows the username or number, thread number, and rating they gave. I fear it could all be encrypted. But something so small shouldn't

Your the only forum that I know of that has created guidelines for it's mods, rather then the quick chat over Messenger saying "just mod the place", where people abuse the power, and attempt to be power hungry infront of other members. A charter & guidelines helps inforce these rules about being a mod, so the community doesn't turn into chaos. I will be the first to say, thank you for doing so.

That is a decent point, the system does know what you voted a thread and remembers.

I thought maybe it's done by a cookie on your end, but I don't think so... it must be stored somewhere, but as you said I doubt it's a huge txt file well layed out and formatted and easy to read :p

Still it would be nice to hear from those who do run the coding side of Neowin to see what they have to say.

[Fred Derf Veteran]

Hold on, so you get to be rude to people and call them idiots, but members cant? Thats not very fair now is it?

You can be rude to people all you want so long as they are not members. If you look closely Neobond was not speaking to a member (at least not an active one).

[»X«]

So you can call someone an idiot, ban them and then your immune from your own rules?