87 replies to this topic

[Elvenlord]

Here is a new system being impletemented:
Warn levels will now be in levels 20%

0%- Nothing
20%- Just a warn
40%- 1 day suspension
60%- 3 day suspension, member may not be promoted to project team or hosted. Will not affect those already there.
80%- 7 day suspension
100%- Banned

Some warn guidelines:
Serious flaming is instantly warnable.
Less serious flaming is warnable after a warning is given in the topic to cease.
Illegal... pretty much anything. Copies, wares, etc.

Special cases may result in a immediate ban.

After some time has passed without an offense, warns levels will be removed.

This is an effort to actually make warns more of a an effective system here at Revora.

[Beowulf]

Fine and dandy IF warns expire after a certain amount of time. Otherwise, this is lame.

[Elvenlord]

Sorry, yes they do. After a certain amount of time they will be removed. Will edit post.

[Beowulf]

Now this gets the Fen Seal of Approval.

[Bart]

But the certain amount of time won't be very short and it should be offenseless. It's not like they will disappear regardless of what you did.

[Caspa]

Well I definately agree with this. I've always wanted the warn system to have a real function instead of just being a badge of honour for the pains in the arse on here.

[segwayrulz]

it took me ages for my warn to go away, this system will be alot better if there is like an autotimer on warns

[Bart]

That defeats the purpose. If you don't improve after a warn, you don't lose it.

[Destroyer]

That defeats the purpose. If you don't improve after a warn, you don't lose it.

If you don't improve after a warn, you get warned again. Autotimer should exist, because whoever's in charge of warning people (I lose track in the massive staff system) should continue to warn people if they don't improve. No need to give the extra burden of having to manually de-warn people as well, assuming they're doing their job in the first place.

[Beowulf]

If you don't improve after a warn, you get warned again. Autotimer should exist, because whoever's in charge of warning people (I lose track in the massive staff system) should continue to warn people if they don't improve. No need to give the extra burden of having to manually de-warn people as well, assuming they're doing their job in the first place.

This.

[Phil]

I don't think scheduled warn removal is possible in IPB (2.3). Maybe we could write a script ourselves but I'm not sure if that's worth the hassle, to be honest.

[Bart]

Firstly, let's not waste our time on talking about auto timers, since IPB simply does not support them. (edit: DLotS beat me to it)

Secondly, there's a difference between improving your attitude and not doing things that get you warned. You don't lose a warning by not earning more, you lose a warning by showing extra good behaviour.

[Bereneth Túrien]

Is there a way for staff and admins to see what a member was warned for? Because otherwise someone might get warned multiple times for the same post.

[MirkwoodArcher]

Is there a way for staff and admins to see what a member was warned for? Because otherwise someone might get warned multiple times for the same post.

That's a good question. I would like to know that too.

I think it would also be helpful to know what the person was warned for in the past so that we can keep an eye on things.

[Caspa]

Yeah, just click on the members warn meter thing and it'll tell you the full warn history.

Also, fuck this idea with auto timers. Why not just quickly check a members warn, if you notice it's been raised.
The time will be there. The reason will be there. Use your discretion. It's not that hard.

[some_weirdGuy]

With manual de-warning i can see how the issue of not being noticed would occur. I mean, if no one notices that you've gotten a warning and that you are being good, then you aren't going to get your warn removed despite the fact it should be.


and with more severe consequences what happens if someone got a warning but then were really good and should have had it removed, but instead went unnoticed, then got warned for something else later on. Then they would get punished even though they really shouldn't have.

[Caspa]

With manual de-warning i can see how the issue of not being noticed would occur.

Here's a silly idea to sort that out. Try paying attention to the rest of the forum instead of sitting in the RCC, bitching about nothing.
There's staff active in every area, right? If you actually pay some attention, where's the problem? It wasn't that hard, back when
I was part of the staff. Now that half the active member base is either Staff or higher, it should be even easier.

Edited by Caspa, 27 September 2009 - 06:44 AM.

[Bereneth Túrien]

I, for one, chec kto see why someone is warned whenever I notice they've been warned.

[Pasidon]

Like me bein' warned for comparing modern dance to Hitler. ... Then warned again for removing that warn.

[Beowulf]

Everyone who is against autotimers misses one important thing - how do you determine whether or not a warn should be removed? I disagree that it should just be based on the merits of the user since that's a poor way to do things since it's entirely uneven. Auto-expiry eliminates the need to manually check every warned user and checking their behavior since the warn. Even then, the warns are still there but don't count and that is displayed each time a user is warned again. If there's a lot, warn at a higher level instead of just one level.

If IPB doesn't have auto-expiry on warns, that's just sad. And if it really doesn't, what the fuck are you paying for?