Bungie.net Community
This topic has moved here: Subject: Warning/Ban Messages
  • Subject: Warning/Ban Messages
Subject: Warning/Ban Messages

@JosephBiwald
View my Art

Per Audacia Ad Astra

I wouldn't know about the other moderators because I've only received one warning and no bans. But Foman put this as the reason, which it was, Off-topic posting and spam/cross-posting. Fan art goes in the Gallery Forum and ONLY in the Gallery Forum.(Posted one of my art pieces in the Community due to the Bungie day theme, and I also posted it in the Flood)

  • 07.12.2011 9:45 AM PDT

Like me? Love me? Got a crush? Follow me on Twitter

| Forum Rules | Terms of Use | Code of Conduct |


Posted by: Skibur
It's just a shame that someone can just want to be heard and accepted and only ever get ridiculed and ignored in return and then end up being punished on top and in spite of it all.


Harassment is dealt with when it is seen. You know that we're not all knowing. We can't see every little thing. If you note examples of harassment, please report them or PM a moderator regarding them.

As far as being "punished on top of it," you can't make that assertion. You can't view another user's warning and ban history. That is between the rule enforcers and that user.

You define punishment as a ban and seem to be suggesting we immediately ban while ignoring intentions. You're forgetting that warning/ban messages are designed to develop user history for other moderators to examine and designed to explain the improper behavior. They have a dual purpose. If a user history suggests a pattern of abuse, escalation is bound to occur.

  • 07.12.2011 9:46 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Mythic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I'm psychic, duh.

Also, you don't have to be everywhere at once when they're right under your nose.

Also, because I've done this before...

http://www.bungie.net/Account/profile.aspx?player=Voidal
http://www.bungie.net/Account/profile.aspx?uid=10753009
http://www.bungie.net/Account/profile.aspx?uid=10380014
http://www.bungie.net/Account/profile.aspx?uid=10574303
http://www.bungie.net/Account/profile.aspx?uid=8441702
http://www.bungie.net/Account/profile.aspx?uid=10488068
etc.

[Edited on 07.12.2011 10:19 AM PDT]

  • 07.12.2011 9:49 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

So do all who live to see such times, but that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us.

-Gandalf

I somewhat concur.

  • 07.12.2011 10:00 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Well, here we are. I guess that it was destined to come to this.

Here's a question, and I think that the responses may be telling.

If warnings had no title impact, would you (personally) be happier?

Because as I read through this, people appear to consider a warning as a punishment. The only negative impact from a warning that I am aware of is how it temporarily effects the trust and title system.

Keep in mind, that if you answer the question with a "yes", then your argument of "we should be counseled and better informed as to our misdeeds as this is a teachable moment" is somewhat undermined. Because if someone sees a warning as a punishment instead of just a warning, then what was it that makes it punishing?

  • 07.12.2011 10:05 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Mythic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I think only bans should be thought of as punishments. Warnings should be warnings with no consequences.

  • 07.12.2011 10:07 AM PDT

Now, in the quantum moment before the closure, when all become one. One moment left. One point of space and time.

I know who you are.

You are Destiny.

After reading this thread, I am going to have to agree with you Skibur. I think it would do a lot more for the member if the moderator is as clear as possible on why the user is to be banned/warned. A few words is nothing but a confusing directive if the moderator isn't specific. These questions will arise: why did you ban me? What did I say that was [insert reason here]? Now I understand this cant apply to all offenses, obviously. Every thought that was going through the moderator's head should be included on the ban message so the user is completely aware on why they were warned/banned.

Pulling from my past, an example of a poorly executed warning is below:
Post anything like that again and I will permaban you. Now, I'm not arguing whether I deserved the warning or not, but rather suggesting that when the moderator issues warnings such as this they could be a bit more specific. More information is always better for everyone, and makes life less confusing :)

  • 07.12.2011 10:12 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Telec
Remember kids: when Uncle Delta tells you he has sweeties, he isn't lying.

Now get in the van.


The Black Chapter


Posted by: Recon Number 54
Here's a question, and I think that the responses may be telling.

If warnings had no title impact, would you (personally) be happier?

Because as I read through this, people appear to consider a warning as a punishment. The only negative impact from a warning that I am aware of is how it temporarily effects the trust and title system.

Keep in mind, that if you answer the question with a "yes", then your argument of "we should be counseled and better informed as to our misdeeds as this is a teachable moment" is somewhat undermined. Because if someone sees a warning as a punishment instead of just a warning, then what was it that makes it punishing?


A warning is a warning. A heads-up. The fact it actually has an effect on something makes it a punishment.
You'll see a fair number of people upset about losing their title over the loss of forum posting rights for 3 days - thats mainly the effect of a short-term ban I suspect.

A warning is a mini-ban. The same measurable negative effect happens.

Personally I think a warning should be a Ninja sending you a private message saying "Hey, take a look at what you posted in [url=link]this thread[/url]. This post is breaking [X rule]. You might not have known about it, [url=link to rules]here are the rules[/url]. If you did know, don't do it again as next time you'll be banned regardless.".

have the warning still appear to mods in the 'Mod history' so other mods can see, just no need to make it a punishment.

  • 07.12.2011 10:19 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Well, here we are. I guess that it was destined to come to this.

Posted by: Skibur
I think only bans should be thought of as punishments. Warnings should be warnings with no consequences.

Fair enough.

But I happen to like that a warning has a little bit of a "swat to the back of the head" so it gets the member's attention.

If we were to go to the "warnings are no harm, no foul" then I would be more inclined to hand out 3 day bans when I am unable to clearly determine intent or malice.

  • 07.12.2011 10:24 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Mythic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

What exactly are you "warning" about?

Are you warning that if you break a rule you could get banned? If so, the warning is just a warning! How can it be a punishment? If the warning is a punishment, then where is the warning for the warning?

Also, come on guys... Last time a mod was linked to a post of mine I was banned straight away for reasons I still don't agree with, but I've linked you right in this thread to someone who obviously should be banned and nothing has been done about it...

[Edited on 07.12.2011 10:33 AM PDT]

  • 07.12.2011 10:26 AM PDT

ShadowKnight X0

I would never, EVER, want or even try to tick Bungie off.
EVER!

  • 07.12.2011 10:33 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: deltahalo UK

What I'm getting at is that if there is clear evidence a member is well behaved, that a post that may break the rules is accidentally submitted, by all means warn them, but they clearly deserve to be told why in some detail as the rule may well have eluded them.


I don't feel anything can be "accidentally submitted". If that's the case then it's all about personal responsibility.

Other than that I really have nothing new to add to the conversation so I'm not going to ramble on about agreeing/disagreeing with various members in this thread.

  • 07.12.2011 10:33 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Well, here we are. I guess that it was destined to come to this.

Posted by: Skibur
What exactly are you "warning" about?

Are you warning that if you break a rule you could get banned? If so, the warning is just a warning! How can it be a punishment? If the warning is a punishment, then where is the warning for the warning?

I don't consider a temporary change to a title as a punishment. I consider it attention getting. Just like a pull on a leash gets the attention of one of my dogs, or shouting out someone's name to let them know that you have something to say to them. The message is important, the method to get the attention is secondary.

I consider the inability to post on an account as a punishment.

Remember how it used to be? 7 and 14 or permas? We would have to warn publicly (which was determined to be a calling out, embarrassing, and harmed the delicate psyches of our more sensitive members) or we could send PM's (normally ignored). So, 3 day bans were created and they were "the warning".

People complained that it was "too harsh a punishment" and so, we then had warnings via the Soul.

And now THOSE are too harsh?

*sigh*

  • 07.12.2011 10:33 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Mythic Member

“Strange,” mused the Director, as they turned away, “strange to think that even in Our Ford’s day most games were played without more apparatus than a ball or two and a few sticks and perhaps a bit of netting. imagine the folly of allowing people to play elaborate games which do nothing whatever to increase consumption.”

The Black Chapter!

Posted by: erac2detsaw2
I don't feel anything can be "accidentally submitted". If that's the case then it's all about personal responsibility.
In the pasts I've made posts which I thought to be OK but the moderator thought to not be. I'd classify that as an accidental rule violation.

  • 07.12.2011 10:37 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Mythic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Telec
In the pasts I've made posts which I thought to be OK but the moderator thought to not be. I'd classify that as an accidental rule violation.
Exactly. Ever been shocked or angry when you find out you've been banned?

  • 07.12.2011 10:39 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Well, here we are. I guess that it was destined to come to this.

Posted by: Telec
Posted by: erac2detsaw2
I don't feel anything can be "accidentally submitted". If that's the case then it's all about personal responsibility.
In the pasts I've made posts which I thought to be OK but the moderator thought to not be. I'd classify that as an accidental rule violation.

Or unintentional, or debatable.

But the post is posted, the warning/ban is placed... none of those can be "undone". The best that can be hoped for, if it is needed, is a discussion between the member/moderator and an understanding of each other's position/reasoning.

Other than the obvious folks who are intent on causing disruptions, I understand that "normal members" don't think that their posts are "bad" or "wrong" or "rule violating". In some cases, they have even rationalized why "this should be an exception". All of that is well and good, but it happens on the member's side of the equation. The moderator has a similar thought process and evaluation and I can assure you, just like most members are well intentioned, no moderator is gleefully rubbing their hands together wondering whose day they can ruin next.

[Edited on 07.12.2011 10:46 AM PDT]

  • 07.12.2011 10:45 AM PDT

Known by some, but not by all.
Soffish: Do not eat!
TWP Assistant Director.

Not so much angry, but disappointed with myself. Live and learn?
Posted by: Skibur
Posted by: Telec
In the pasts I've made posts which I thought to be OK but the moderator thought to not be. I'd classify that as an accidental rule violation.
Exactly. Ever been shocked or angry when you find out you've been banned?

  • 07.12.2011 10:46 AM PDT

The Forerunner, the Great Journey, and Heaven Theory

[Announcement Trailer] Halo: Forerunner

Posted by: Agustus
I lol'd at the absurd miscommunication that occurs whenever dibbs post something. Perhaps his brain is so highly evolved that he can no longer clearly communicate with lesser life forms, even among his own species.

After reading this entire thread, I realize how far the conversation has shifted (shocking), but I'd like to get back to this

Posted by: Recon Number 54

Which is a long winded version of "off-topic". While a new member might be confused by the two word version, I would imagine that a member with a couple of thousand replies and a few hundred OP's under their belt would understand either the two word explanation or the 23 word one.

Between the pre-inserted "you have been warned banned...." and the post URL, there isn't a ton of room for detailed explanation. I used to have long winded explanations, and then found out that my attempts to educate and inform were being cut off mid ramble.

So, we have to be short and sweet. If the message in unclear, confusing, or doesn't provide sufficient information for the member "to learn from", the banned/warned member has all of the information they need to start up a PM conversation with the specific moderator asking for specifics and to discuss details.

Going to the forums with it is going to be far less effective and IMO just creates another "look at my ban/warn, isn't this ridiculous?" thread.


The premise seems to be that most experienced users would know the rules and thus would not need a detailed explanation (and would not need to PM a moderator) while a newer user who has yet to take the time to read the rules would engage in a dialog via PMs.

I would argue, however, that both groups (save for the people that obviously know what they are doing) would PM you for an explanation; not solely for lack of understanding of the rules, but for lack of understanding in moderator intent. Whether you are a new or old user, guessing intent (which, hidden behind the text of the rules, is really the true rule set) is impossible outside of an extended dialog. You yourself have acknowledged in this thread that moderators are not always on the same wavelength in regards to rule enforcement (how can they be?), so, that leaves the individual thought process responsible for a large portion of moderating decisions.

In that case, then, I have to agree with Skibur. It would be much more beneficial to list the reasons behind why someone was warned or banned (and even why they were warned instead of banned or vice versa). Many users can read and comprehend the rules, but many still face moderation despite that. In your messages, simply listing what rule they violated is not enough for people who already know the rules. You need to explain your intent in order to get people to understand as well as to allow people to have a reasonable base from which to launch objections. Being purposely vague doesn't make for a very good appeals process (in addition to the [unsubstantiated] claims that many moderators ignore PMs). Users who argue from a knowledge of intent would be able to clarify their positions and objections to a ban/warning better than simply saying "you broke this rule". I realize this would require more work, but in the same vein I know you do not have time to engage every banned/warned user in a dialog as to why they were warned or banned. Explaining yourself the first time would hopefully eliminate the need to have many of the back and forth PMs.

/two cents

  • 07.12.2011 10:52 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

This faith is my state.....otherwise Babylon.


Posted by: Recon Number 54
Here's a question, and I think that the responses may be telling.

If warnings had no title impact, would you (personally) be happier?
Do warnings strip a person of the exalted/noble/honorable prefixes? If so it's definitely a punishment and I'd rather take a 14 day ban with no effect on my prefix (which somewhat defeats the purpose of the prefix but you know what I mean... 14 days is a whole lot shorter than the three years it takes to get to Exalted.

[Edited on 07.12.2011 11:19 AM PDT]

  • 07.12.2011 11:01 AM PDT

Hello! I'm Bunie.net's resident medical student (hell i'm sure there are more but I'm the only one who openly declares it!) I love my emblem, and I am periodically active.
I have a Twitter

We learn from our mistakes, it needs to point out the mistake so we can learn from it?

  • 07.12.2011 11:10 AM PDT


Posted by: ImTriForceGuy
The mindset needs to change. If its obviously a troll thread, report and move on.
Yes, its hard at times to ignore the stupid that has been posted, but its for the best.


By not reporting and just moving on, lots of people are ignoring it.

  • 07.12.2011 11:18 AM PDT


Posted by: Recon Number 54
Posted by: Skibur
I think only bans should be thought of as punishments. Warnings should be warnings with no consequences.

Fair enough.

But I happen to like that a warning has a little bit of a "swat to the back of the head" so it gets the member's attention.

If we were to go to the "warnings are no harm, no foul" then I would be more inclined to hand out 3 day bans when I am unable to clearly determine intent or malice.


Why?

If you can't determine intent or malice, then the post must not be bad enough to ban at all. Shouldn't that make you more likely to send out a warning?

  • 07.12.2011 11:21 AM PDT


Posted by: Recon Number 54
Keep in mind, that if you answer the question with a "yes", then your argument of "we should be counseled and better informed as to our misdeeds as this is a teachable moment" is somewhat undermined. Because if someone sees a warning as a punishment instead of just a warning, then what was it that makes it punishing?


Isn't that the point of a warning? To warn, rather than punish?

  • 07.12.2011 11:22 AM PDT