A Modest Proposal regarding Rule Breaks

Shawna · February 22, 2009, 06:16:21 AM

I am thinking that maybe keeping tabs on offenses for 60 days is a little long. I think it might be better to only keep tabs for 30 days.

Also, and I am not clear on this based on the Penalties page, but do offenses you've already done time for continue to count towards a future Corner restriction? That doesn't seem right, if they do.

See, it seems to me that some of our members are kind of hot-headed. They don't plan to break rules, but *bang* there they go again. One could easily spend a great deal of time in the Corner. And I would rather people be out and about, posting in other threads, whenever possible....

Anyway, if a person can keep his/her rule breaks down below 3 rule breaks in any given thirty days, then I think that is an acceptable level of hooliganism.....

What do you think? I hate to see people constantly cycling in and out of the Corner, just because they're a bit hot-headed.

Happy Evolute · February 22, 2009, 08:51:32 AM

Hi Shawna,

The calculation has been adjusted considerably since we started the Forum, we originally had a six month live period, and a geometric sequence for calculating the days (3, 6, 12, 24, ...) rather than the arithmetic one we use now (3, 4, 5, 6, ...). That was stupidly vindictive, so we eventually adjusted to the present system.

There is no reason why the adjustment should not continue.

Do you not think that making the period shorter might encourage a culture of "I'm allowed one insult per month"? Your proposal would give them two insults per month.

The intention is to encourage people to follow the rules, rather than to spend time punishing them. Do you think your proposal would be better at doing that than the present settlement?

Regards,

HE

Shawna · February 22, 2009, 09:02:28 AM

Well, I understand why you have your rules. And I think that they are good rules. But I also know that the topics that are discussed on IGI do tend to bring out the hot-head in people.... if that tendency is there.

Under the present rules, people who can stay calm in an argument are rewarded. People who fly off the handle more easily are penalized. I am not against this, but I am concerned about the way that the same people seem to get stuck in the corner in rapid succession. It's not good to lose the input of the more-hot-headed person in a thread, because they got put in the corner. If they get out of hand, yeah, they need to cool down in the corner. But I don't think that 2 rule breaks in a month really qualifies as out-of-hand.

Hot-heads are good to have around. I would hate to have them so frustrated by repeated trips to the Corner that they decide not to post here any more.

Happy Evolute · February 22, 2009, 11:40:49 AM

Hey, I am a hot head too! Why can't other hot heads keep to the rules? No-one is forcing them to break the rules!

We have a system whereby there is no penalty for the first two rule breaks, that should be enough for anyone to get the hang of them, and then the breaks become void after two months so they can start again. You are suggesting that we reduce the void time to accomodate people who deliberately break them?

Why is one month better than two months?

To answer your earlier question, Corner time is calculated by counting the number of live rule breaks in the Member Penalty Log. That number is the same as the number of days awarded, so long as it is greater than two. People who want to spend less time in the Corner should check the log first and wait until some offences have expired before (deliberately) re-offending, and making more work for the Mods.

Assyriankey · February 22, 2009, 12:04:52 PM

Quote from: Shawna on February 22, 2009, 06:16:21 AM
What do you think?

I think your proposal, if adopted, will lead to an increased moderator workload.

JustMyron · February 22, 2009, 02:57:46 PM

If we were talking about a real-life debate, it might be reasonable to make allowances for hotheadedness, because people don't have the opportunity to step back and cool down. But this is a computer-based discussion. Nobody is forcing anyone to post while they're frustrated. If you read something that makes you want to say something insulting or otherwise against the rules, you can take the time to go away and do something else, and come back when you're calmer, and then phrase your post carefully so that everyone knows exactly the level of contempt or frustration you were feeling, but it doesn't break any rules.

In other words, I don't think hotheads are at a disadvantage. In fact, forcing them to follow the rules (or, do as Rakhel has done and willingly take corner time for an insult they consider "worth it") might teach any who aren't used to calming themselves down to do so.

Being too lenient on hotheadedness also negatively impacts the atmosphere of the forum. You can't please everyone, but you've got to be balanced. Right now, we have some people who have left because the forum is too contentious for them (I've been privately informed of one, before she left, and I'm sure there are others), and some who have left because they don't feel free to say what they want (Codswallop, and I'm sure there are others on his end as well).

Personally, I think we're not too hot, not to cold... just about right, right now.

But that's just my opinion.

Vynn · February 22, 2009, 04:46:43 PM

Oh darn. I clicked on this thread hoping to get a witty Jonathan Swift/Modest Proposal style essay. Oh well.

Assyriankey · February 22, 2009, 04:50:03 PM

Quote from: Vynn on February 22, 2009, 04:46:43 PM
Oh darn. I clicked on this thread hoping to get a witty Jonathan Swift/Modest Proposal style essay. Oh well.

Check your PMs, then complain.

Shawna · February 22, 2009, 05:18:08 PM

Quote from: Vynn on February 22, 2009, 04:46:43 PM
Oh darn. I clicked on this thread hoping to get a witty Jonathan Swift/Modest Proposal style essay. Oh well.

I did that just for you, Vynn.

I nearly posted at the bottom of the OP, "Or we could just eat them," but I just couldn't bring myself to do it.

Assyriankey · February 22, 2009, 05:21:56 PM

Shawna, you're so hot in the morning :)

Shawna · February 22, 2009, 05:24:34 PM

And you're up so late. You were here when I logged off, and you're still here!

Former Believer · February 22, 2009, 05:27:45 PM

Seeing all the disciplinary action recently has made me feel like I am in Junior High School. I agree with HE...people should be able to refrain from going overboard, even if they are tempted to do so.

I wouldn't mind seeing a permanent ban after two offenses. Or a one year ban.

rickymooston · February 22, 2009, 05:55:50 PM

Quote from: Former Believer on February 22, 2009, 05:27:45 PM
Seeing all the disciplinary action recently has made me feel like I am in Junior High School. I agree with HE...people should be able to refrain from going overboard, even if they are tempted to do so.

I wouldn't mind seeing a permanent ban after two offenses. Or a one year ban.

Some offenses are a bit too arbitrary. Specifically rule 6.

The rules indicate implied insults are allowed and yet sometimes thay are not.

By your criterion, the forum owner would be banned from his own forum for a year. WTF, he's paying for the place.

Former Believer · February 22, 2009, 07:33:17 PM

Well, perhaps the rules need to be revised then. It just seems to me, though, that people should be able to refrain from acting in a juvenile manner.

News:

A Modest Proposal regarding Rule Breaks