New Infraction System

[Bob Hubbard]

No it means what it says. Here, I am not aware of your breaking any rules that I currently remember.

I'm not privy to much of how things work elsewhere.

 

[Kacey]

I may have missed this part - how will people know they have committed infractions/lost points? And will the rest of us know, or just the person involved and the moderator(s)?

 

[Lisa]

I may have missed this part - how will people know they have committed infractions/lost points? And will the rest of us know, or just the person involved and the moderator(s)?

Infraction points will show up in your profile and can only be viewed by the person to whom the infraction points were given and by the moderators/admin.

 

[Mustafa]

I dont think i have broken you rules.
But now i have -127 point.
I think i should be banned, according to your rules.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

You are confusing reputation points with infraction points.
They are not the same.

 

[Mustafa]

You are confusing reputation points with infraction points.
They are not the same.

Oh... sorry.
Where do i see what i have reputation points?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

USERCP for both.

Infractions and Reputation are both clearly labeled.

If you'd had more than 20 infraction points, your account would have been suspended. 100 points is a ban.

 

[EmperorOfKentukki]

What if a poster willfully commits an infraction of one of the General Posting Rules - Revised 8-28-2005, but then edits the post within a few minutes to cover up the original infraction? Will that member still be punished according to the penalties listed for that rule?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

If we see it, or if it is reported before it's posted, possibly. Depends on what the willful infraction was. I think the safe bet is, don't test us.

 

[EmperorOfKentukki]

So....then....would it make any difference who the poster is that committed the offense?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

no

 

[MJS]

So....then....would it make any difference who the poster is that committed the offense?

If you're hinting that we play favorites, I'd have to say that you would be incorrect on that. When there is a problem, we make sure that it is discussed with the staff and in certain cases, its kicked up to the Supers and Admins. We make sure that things are discussed fully before acting upon them.

Mike

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Staff who have existing relationships with an individual (friend, partner, teacher, student, etc) are not allowed to moderate those individuals, nor are staff who are actively engaged in an a thread allowed to moderate that thread, though they may post the official notices on direction from the steering board. We have put numerous policies into place to remove personal bias from our decisions.

 

[EmperorOfKentukki]

That's good to know....because I remember a post that now reads:

I have lived in places where had I made your comment to a local I would have looked down to see a knife stickingout of my chest.

But originally it read:

I have lived in places where had I made your comment to a local you would have looked down to see a knife stickingout of your chest.

Only I don't believe any moderators had a chance to see it because it got edited. Well...a couple may have....but it doesn't seem it got reported because according to:

No "Challenges" - If there is a threat or physical challenge, real or perceived, issued, the person making said threat will be immediately banned from this board with no warning or recourse.

So I'm glad to see hear exceptions won't ever be made .....because a rule is a rule...and well...you do have to enforce them or else credibility would be damaged if people thought the rules didn't apply to everyone.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Yes, that was reviewed, and when taken in context with the rest of the post, no threat was seen by those who reviewed it.

 

[MJS]

That's good to know....because I remember a post that now reads:



But originally it read:



Only I don't believe any moderators had a chance to see it because it got edited. Well...a couple may have....but it doesn't seem it got reported because according to:



So I'm glad to see hear exceptions won't ever be made .....because a rule is a rule...and well...you do have to enforce them or else credibility would be damaged if people thought the rules didn't apply to everyone.

Did you report this post? As it has been stated many times, members are free to report a problem post. Its that red triangle in the upper right hand corner. As far as the post you're talking about...as Bob stated, it was looked at, and there was no apparent threat being made to you.

 

[The Master]

An interesting system. It allows for a consistent and logical measurement of sin. When the scales of justice are significantly unbalanced, the hammer of justice crashes down, and the offender has no one to blame but him or her self. Being somewhat familiar with the underlying mechanism, it allows for, if configured for, the sending of a warning, a message, or an actual infraction, or a combination of those as seen fit by the constabulary. Experience has shown however, when the infractor has accrued enough points to qualify them for punishment, they will loudly and most stupidly proclaim the bias in the system, ignorant to the simple truism that they are masters of their own fate, and responsible for their own actions. Those most likely to do so, are often quite apparent by their continued public and private lambasting and debating of things that are not subject for negotiation.

 

[The Master]

Interesting. Much debate on the undebatable. Questions were asked for, but challenges of authority are the reply. Page 4 this is, yet little more on how this system works or will be run have we learned, though the sparring of arms hast begun. Facinating.

 

[The Master]

That's good to know....because I remember a post that now reads:



But originally it read:



Only I don't believe any moderators had a chance to see it because it got edited. Well...a couple may have....but it doesn't seem it got reported because according to:



So I'm glad to see hear exceptions won't ever be made .....because a rule is a rule...and well...you do have to enforce them or else credibility would be damaged if people thought the rules didn't apply to everyone.

To my educated eye, it seems a correction of possession was done as what you claim to be the original makes little sense.

I have lived in places where had I made your comment to a local you would have looked down to see a knife stickingout of your chest.

Why would a local inflict damage on your person, for the words of another? More importantly, how would the local know where to find you in order to inflict such punishment, and even most importantly, would they know the length of the required blade to inflict the correct non fatal, but painful damage to you for what someone else said in some other place?

Truly it is a dizzying puzzle.

 

[EmperorOfKentukki]

The most difficult task is to stand firm with one's convictions in the face of prejudgement, particularly where defending liberty and justice leads to public branding that taint's the jury pool even before the leveling of charge. Is the justice of the 'scarlet letter' truly a just measure and action? When men of concious cried freedom from tyranny at the hand of a system proclaiming benevolence but delivering unfairness did these men skulk quietyly away into dark places as their reputations had painted them by the ministers of the crown, or did they pursue vigorously the righteous path of their voices to a day when their former masters looked to them as guide to fairer politic. Was Washington not guilty of treason? Was Gandi not a convicted criminal? Was not Jesus a terrorist to the State? Should a man be force to fight a war, to starve himself, to allow himself be crucified so he may be judged not on his reputation but upon the essence of his being? Have we not become better? Have we learned nothing? Or are we so sure of our humility...our greatness of character as learned men of warrior experience that we no longer see the ease with which we may move from men of justice to participants in tyranny? Are we better judged by our deliverance of justice...or by our mercies? Should we convict one innocent man to keep one hundred guilty men from escaping our justice?

Do you ever ponder such....as I do?