[Discussion] Clearer rules for Delete on Sight?

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

We all know - or should - NationStates has a reasonably encompassing number of relevantly well-worded rules for many different improper behaviors, that might vary accordingly to the forum in which you post.

We also know that not partaking into them can lead you to informal warnings, that do not change a certain number in your User Control Panel, that might be advice or alike the red text of a school teacher, formal warnings, that count heavily to your historic, forum bans of variable size, deletions of accounts (DEAT, internal joke for "death"), and, for players with a known long-term historic of abuse, the complete lack of authorization to use the website again, what is known as DoS (short for Deleted on Sight in this particular context).

Some of us are also increasingly surprised with the way how some of these rules are applied, causing people to wonder why long-term, experienced users with seemingly gifted social and intellectual skills have deletions of accounts for a list of historical engagement in the aforementioned abuses.

But, as far as I could tell, we've never exactly been told what would be counted to a thermometer with tolerance for your behavior as a long-term forum poster, especially these with no particularly yawning, cumbersome individual rule-violations (e.g. everything past non-PG-13 and flaming but short of gore-spamming or potentially compromising the sites' status in either security, technical or law terms - to which what leads to a DoS status would be obvious), in spite or not of your status as a player who already lost a nation.

So, Moderation, can it be specified? Should it be specified, at request or as a general rule for all of us? How much long can the administration and forum moderation team stand to allowing for the presence of a particular forum poster who annoys them but not enough to regard as an inherently problematic presence, until their tolerance thermometer bursts and their personal presence here is banished forever? Say, 7 nations like Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro? 21 like Frivisivia? (Not mentioning people, of course.) Can someone be DoS'd for behaviors they are not strongly spotted engaging at historically, meaning somebody known for flaming could end in this status for spamming or vice-versa? Can the reasons for DoSing "half-normal, half-well-behaving" people as a negative influence on the site be mentioned, or is it really a "we are too tired" thing? (Not doing moral judgement about that, mind you.)

[NERVUN]

There's no hard and fast rule, but in general it's usually informal warning > warning(s) > short ban > longer ban > DEAT. When we've done this dance two or three times, then we start talking about DOS.

Now mind you, DOS is applied when it becomes apparent that the user in question is simply not going to follow the rules. That's why we say we take history into consideration, is this the same ol' from the same ol'? Have we tried the whole list a few times? Well then... But, of course, we do make exceptions for insta-DOS when we run into something that is completely unacceptable including porn, gore, or threats to the game.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

Thanks for the elucidation.

When we've done this dance two or three times, then we start talking about DOS.

Well, that escalates quickly.

[NERVUN]

Thanks for the elucidation.

When we've done this dance two or three times, then we start talking about DOS.

Well, that escalates quickly.

Hopefully not. Hopefully losing a nation makes someone pull back. Losing two should be a clear sign that something's wrong.

But, yes, I have seen people go from 0 to DOS within a week and having lost a couple of nations in the process.

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

Hopefully not. Hopefully losing a nation makes someone pull back. Losing two should be a clear sign that something's wrong.

But, yes, I have seen people go from 0 to DOS within a week and having lost a couple of nations in the process.

Oh, I was meaning more like people who lose a nation every one or two years. You know, snarky Generalites.

[Totally Not Leningrad Union]

There's no hard and fast rule, but in general it's usually informal warning > warning(s) > short ban > longer ban > DEAT. When we've done this dance two or three times, then we start talking about DOS.

Now mind you, DOS is applied when it becomes apparent that the user in question is simply not going to follow the rules. That's why we say we take history into consideration, is this the same ol' from the same ol'? Have we tried the whole list a few times? Well then... But, of course, we do make exceptions for insta-DOS when we run into something that is completely unacceptable including porn, gore, or threats to the game.

By this logic, Yehuddah and I should be DOS by now? I've heard mixed things about DOS. I hear it's just when you get DEATed over and over during a period of time, but I also hear that it is only for the worst people (i.e. Verbluffen, Kazakov). Please enlighten me.

[Dyakovo]

There's no hard and fast rule, but in general it's usually informal warning > warning(s) > short ban > longer ban > DEAT. When we've done this dance two or three times, then we start talking about DOS.

Now mind you, DOS is applied when it becomes apparent that the user in question is simply not going to follow the rules. That's why we say we take history into consideration, is this the same ol' from the same ol'? Have we tried the whole list a few times? Well then... But, of course, we do make exceptions for insta-DOS when we run into something that is completely unacceptable including porn, gore, or threats to the game.

By this logic, Yehuddah and I should be DOS by now.

I'm glad we agree.
*nods*
Yeah, yeah, I snipped out a bunch of stuff, eliminating context and all that...

[Forsher]

DoS (that is often interpreted, also with a context-based tone for humor, as short for Deleted on Sight).

That is because, in the context of NS, this is what DoS means. Denial of Service is neither here nor there. Also here. And here. And in the old OSRS.

Some of us are also increasingly surprised with the way how some of these rules are applied, causing people to wonder why long-term, experienced users with seemingly well-endowed social and intellectual skills have deletions of accounts for a list of historical engagement in the aforementioned abuses.

Because, regardless of what we think, they have done this. The example I have used in the past is FST. I knew him from two types of thread. The first were his sex threads. In my opinion, most of them were intended to be normal enough it's just that's not what anyone wanted to talk about. Obviously, they were a bit of a problem. The second kind of thread had a focus on maths/physics type things and FST was much more, well, sane in those. He was DEAT'd for his behaviour in a third kind of thread. Naturally, this was something of a surprise to me but that doesn't mean that he wasn't like that. Of course, it subsequently transpired that he was indeed Unhealthy Truthseekers, a previously DOS'd user (some people had suspected this for a long time).

Long story short, if we're confused it's because we're missing information. Most of which tends to be out there somewhere and it's a matter of finding it. In cases where it isn't available, this is where valid issues stem. See this thread.

But, as far as I could tell, we've never exactly been told what would be counted to a thermometer with tolerance for your behavior as a long-term forum poster, especially these with no particularly yawning, cumbersome individual rule-violations (e.g. everything past non-PG-13 and flaming but short of gore-spamming or potentially compromising the sites' status in either security, technical or law terms - to which what leads to a DoS status would be obvious), in spite or not of your status as a player who already lost a nation.

There cannot be a definite "thermometer" for the simple reason that it varies in every case. My understanding of moderation's approach follows. Someone with an extensive record of flaming/trolling etc. may have accumulated this record over many years of participation with long periods of "clean" behaviour. Warnings and bans appear to be effective. Now, if a user who's been around for a few months develops into a pattern of behaviour with a lot of rule breaking, they're going to get DEAT'd sooner. The long term user will be DEAT'd (or even DOS'd) when they change their behaviour for the worse (bans and warnings appear ineffective) or start committing offences that they'd previously been done for again. Naturally, if a long-term player is DEAT'd for the latter case a newer player reading the decision is less likely to understand it than posters around at the time of the original offence. In other words, we're back to my third paragraph. (This being paragraph four.)

That being said, there is a rough guide that moderation use because that is helpful (i.e. the one that a mod already posted in this thread), just not always applicable. I have had, for example, a day long ban and some informal warnings. In other words, I got to skip the formal warning bit.

There's no hard and fast rule, but in general it's usually informal warning > warning(s) > short ban > longer ban > DEAT. When we've done this dance two or three times, then we start talking about DOS.

Now mind you, DOS is applied when it becomes apparent that the user in question is simply not going to follow the rules. That's why we say we take history into consideration, is this the same ol' from the same ol'? Have we tried the whole list a few times? Well then... But, of course, we do make exceptions for insta-DOS when we run into something that is completely unacceptable including porn, gore, or threats to the game.

By this logic, Yehuddah and I should be DOS by now? I've heard mixed things about DOS. I hear it's just when you get DEATed over and over during a period of time, but I also hear that it is only for the worst people (i.e. Verbluffen, Kazakov). Please enlighten me.

How often have you been DEAT'd? My impression's been that a third DEAT usually means you've been DOS'd.

[NERVUN]

There's no hard and fast rule, but in general it's usually informal warning > warning(s) > short ban > longer ban > DEAT. When we've done this dance two or three times, then we start talking about DOS.

Now mind you, DOS is applied when it becomes apparent that the user in question is simply not going to follow the rules. That's why we say we take history into consideration, is this the same ol' from the same ol'? Have we tried the whole list a few times? Well then... But, of course, we do make exceptions for insta-DOS when we run into something that is completely unacceptable including porn, gore, or threats to the game.

By this logic, Yehuddah and I should be DOS by now? I've heard mixed things about DOS. I hear it's just when you get DEATed over and over during a period of time, but I also hear that it is only for the worst people (i.e. Verbluffen, Kazakov). Please enlighten me.

DOS means Delete on Sight, it means you have been uninvited to play NationStates, your access to the site in any form has been revoked, and if and when we spot you, we will delete you. We are channeling our inner Zod and screaming "I will find you!" There's no "Well, let's think about this" or "He's been good" it's See = Kill. And yes, it is used for the worst. Getting multiple nations deleted may not trigger a DOS depending on circumstances. I mean, was it a case of posting past ban? That's not quite DOS. Now someone posting past ban to post pron... THAT would trigger a DOS.

[Totally Not Leningrad Union]

By this logic, Yehuddah and I should be DOS by now? I've heard mixed things about DOS. I hear it's just when you get DEATed over and over during a period of time, but I also hear that it is only for the worst people (i.e. Verbluffen, Kazakov). Please enlighten me.

DOS means Delete on Sight, it means you have been uninvited to play NationStates, your access to the site in any form has been revoked, and if and when we spot you, we will delete you. We are channeling our inner Zod and screaming "I will find you!" There's no "Well, let's think about this" or "He's been good" it's See = Kill. And yes, it is used for the worst. Getting multiple nations deleted may not trigger a DOS depending on circumstances. I mean, was it a case of posting past ban? That's not quite DOS. Now someone posting past ban to post pron... THAT would trigger a DOS.

Thank you for the explanation, NERVUN.

[Frisbeeteria]

We won't put a metric on it because it's not predictable enough for a metric. There's no hard-and-fast "3 lost nations and you're out" rule. (That's because some people lose two or more spam or ban-breaker or WA multi nations at a throw, and we tend to count those as a single event each. I've seen literally 1,000 puppets deleted in a single action. And no, we won't share details of those cases either.)

There are obvious DOS players: the repeat pornspammers, adbots, the kid who comes in only to post imagespam of a potato. We don't need a lot of discussion on those guys, because the standard is already set. They show up; they die. It doesn't take a consensus opinion of the team to decide that we don't need that sort of idiocy. The mod that spots those sorts of 'players' takes them out as quickly as they are seen. They can be tagged as DOS, banned, or whatever our tools permit.

Longer term players get a DoS order only after accumulating enough warnings to make it clear that they refuse to operate under the rules of this site, AND a consensus of active moderators vote (in our private forum) to have them removed. The circumstances that lead to a vote are nearly always different from prior cases, so we can't spell out a metric that says essentially "avoid this, that, and the other and you'll be fine". The other aspect is that sometimes a DOS vote takes days, weeks, or even months to achieve a consensus. That doesn't mean it takes that long to get enough people voting - it usually means a split consensus, and proponents of DOS wait for further ammunition to bump the thread again.

The upshot of this is that you're not at the mercy of a trigger-happy mod who you're currently battling. There's always an investigation by uninvolved mods (assuming we can find any that haven't interacted with that player), and there are appeal processes in place that permit the player to respond. I will point out that appeals are NOT unlimited - you can't simply keep appealing after a Final Appeal decision has been handed out. By the time we get to final appeal, every moderator has usually signed off on the decision one way or the other.

[Liberonscien]

...snip...

The upshot of this is that you're not at the mercy of a trigger-happy mod who you're currently battling. There's always an investigation by uninvolved mods (assuming we can find any that haven't interacted with that player), and there are appeal processes in place that permit the player to respond. I will point out that appeals are NOT unlimited - you can't simply keep appealing after a Final Appeal decision has been handed out. By the time we get to final appeal, every moderator has usually signed off on the decision one way or the other.

What if all the mods are involved though?

[Frisbeeteria]

What if all the mods are involved though?

Then we do the obvious - we ask the lesser involved mods to run the investigation. Also, the mod team recognizes that some of us are better at some tasks than others. Some are good at thread trawls, some are good at technical investigations, some are good at interacting with parents / schools / police, some are good with tricky ethical / psychological / emotional analysis. And some of us are good at yapping about proposals or making tacos. We self-select the best tools for the job.

[Dyakovo]

What if all the mods are involved though?

Then we do the obvious - we ask the lesser involved mods to run the investigation. Also, the mod team recognizes that some of us are better at some tasks than others. Some are good at thread trawls, some are good at technical investigations, some are good at interacting with parents / schools / police, some are good with tricky ethical / psychological / emotional analysis. And some of us are good at yapping about proposals or making tacos. We self-select the best tools for the job.

You heard it here.
The Mods are tools.
*nods*
couldn't resist...

[Ballotonia]

DoS (that is often interpreted, also with a context-based tone for humor, as short for Deleted on Sight).

That is because, in the context of NS, this is what DoS means.

Correct, I fixed the title of this thread accordingly, as I thought I was supposed to jump in and comment on Denial of Service attacks (which is an Admin issue, not so much a moderation one).

Ballotonia

[Empire of Narnia]

That is because, in the context of NS, this is what DoS means.

Correct, I fixed the title of this thread accordingly, as I thought I was supposed to jump in and comment on Denial of Service attacks (which is an Admin issue, not so much a moderation one).

Ballotonia

That's what I thought too when I read it. I think the rules for Denial-of-Service attacks are pretty clear though: Don't even try to do it.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Then we do the obvious - we ask the lesser involved mods to run the investigation. Also, the mod team recognizes that some of us are better at some tasks than others. Some are good at thread trawls, some are good at technical investigations, some are good at interacting with parents / schools / police, some are good with tricky ethical / psychological / emotional analysis. And some of us are good at yapping about proposals or making tacos. We self-select the best tools for the job.

You heard it here.
The Mods are tools.
*nods*
couldn't resist...

I'm the monkey wrench.

[Bolrieg]

What was Sir Walter (Dingletron) ordered DOS for was it the spud-spam or was it something else?

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

What was Sir Walter (Dingletron) ordered DOS for was it the spud-spam or was it something else?

It's not something we tend to discuss with other players. That said, spamming consistently like that does tend to have a rather DOS'y effect.

[Eepossoi]

Can a DOS get removed

[Kautharr]

Can a DOS get removed

yes, but it's not common.
edit: figured that was a DoS player