- dibbs089
- |
- Elder Mythic Member
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