Discussion: Have the mods gone far enough?

[Katganistan]

I don't know if this has been suggested yet... What if we restrict forum posting from new nations for about a month or so? It would eliminate the ass problem by preventing all but the most die hard troll.

And drive away any new members.

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

Yeah, I really think the mods are overly keen on DEATs for NSG punishments. Many (if not most) Generalites don't play NS and the loss of a nation doesn't really mean too much as a result... especially if they've not been around very long and are trollish.

Even DOS is not that effective. UnhealthyTruthSeeker was able to bypass his DOS multiple times, with Four-Side-Triangles being his last one. There's also that one creepy guy who masqueraded as a girl in the TET thread in NSG. I'm hoping those are just outliers, but I don't even know anymore.

Wait what?

[The Blaatschapen]

Yeah, I really think the mods are overly keen on DEATs for NSG punishments. Many (if not most) Generalites don't play NS and the loss of a nation doesn't really mean too much as a result... especially if they've not been around very long and are trollish.

Even DOS is not that effective. UnhealthyTruthSeeker was able to bypass his DOS multiple times, with Four-Side-Triangles being his last one. There's also that one creepy guy who masqueraded as a girl in the TET thread in NSG. I'm hoping those are just outliers, but I don't even know anymore.

Masquerading as a girl in TET (or the rest of NS) does not get you DoS (not that you said that, but it could be implied from the post). I mean, some people masquerade as sheep.

[Norstal]

Even DOS is not that effective. UnhealthyTruthSeeker was able to bypass his DOS multiple times, with Four-Side-Triangles being his last one. There's also that one creepy guy who masqueraded as a girl in the TET thread in NSG. I'm hoping those are just outliers, but I don't even know anymore.

Masquerading as a girl in TET (or the rest of NS) does not get you DoS (not that you said that, but it could be implied from the post). I mean, some people masquerade as sheep.

No, but I believe he was a DOS user who did that after the DOS, is what I meant. There was Avalar. I was pretty sure there was another one that pretended to be a girl though who was previously DOS, but I I might've mis-remembered.

In any case, a determined troll can troll NS. While I can forgive them for not being able to catch trolls all the time, them being lenient doesn't help the case.

[Imperializt Russia]

Besides, we've been trying to talk the boss into hiring ninja teams since forever as is!

Only because the attack llamas weren't worth spit.

You clearly aren't familiar with the working script of Llamageddon.

[Urran]

It's simple, you break the rules, you get punished. I try my hardest to stay in line. I love the mods.

[The Corparation]

There was Avalar. I was pretty sure there was another one that pretended to be a girl though who was previously DOS, but I I might've mis-remembered.

Avalar never claimed to be a girl. Instead they tried to pass of pictures they found on the internet as pictures of themself. Pictures that were apparently traced back to a gay pornstar's twitter feed. That or someone noticed the resemblance while engaged in Non-NS appropriate activities elsewhere on The Internet. also don't think that user was ever DOS. They just left in shame.

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

There was Avalar. I was pretty sure there was another one that pretended to be a girl though who was previously DOS, but I I might've mis-remembered.

Avalar never claimed to be a girl. Instead they tried to pass of pictures they found on the internet as pictures of themself. Pictures that were apparently traced back to a gay pornstar's twitter feed. That or someone noticed the resemblance while engaged in Non-NS appropriate activities elsewhere on The Internet. also don't think that user was ever DOS. They just left in shame.

Well...maybe a gay pornstar used NS....you know what, never mind I have no idea where i was going with that.

[Swith Witherward]

I don't know if this has been suggested yet... What if we restrict forum posting from new nations for about a month or so? It would eliminate the ass problem by preventing all but the most die hard troll.

It sounds like a good idea but people also join NS because their friends invite them to RP in either the II/NS forums or the P2TM/F7 forums. Limiting usage during a trial phase isn't very practical for this reason.

[Shaggai]

So what would be a desirable way to land harder on things, while still maintaining the flexibility necessary? Do away with slap-on-the-wrist unofficial warnings and cautions in favor of always going for *** the ominous red text? *** Default to 1-day bans on first offenses/greater use of short-term bans lower on the punishment ladder? These are the sorts of things that will give us helpful feedback. For instance, I would be okay skipping the unofficial cautions in favor of going straight to the official warning; unofficials largely serve the purpose of simply building up a picture of the user's habits, but the redtext could serve in that role as well. Heck, I'd even be down with more liberal use of short term 1-day bans, though I imagine people would still be unhappy whenever a bad day or flash of temper lands them on the receiving end of one.

I would prefer you don't hand out 1 day bans willy-nilly. Handing out more official warnings rather than knock-it-offs would be OK. Maybe more less-than-a-day bans if it looks like a usually-good poster has just lost their temper. A couple of hours is enough for someone to regain their composure without the nuisance of being banned for a whole day.

I think that if someone breaks the rules, they should get at least an official warning. Unofficial warnings and knock-it-offs shouldn't be used for rules violations.

[Grenartia]

Don't you have to have an email registered to post on the forums?

Unfortunately, it's just as easy to use a throwaway email account as it is to have a variable IP address. Requiring an email before posting would slow a dedicated troll by perhaps 30 seconds. If they knew about the rule in advance, 5 seconds. Even if we required everyone to use a 'reputable' email provider like Gmail or forced them to use Facebook's login verification system, it's still easy to bypass by making multiple accounts. Believe me, we've looked at these things, and they're not a panacea.

It would still be an improvement over the current system, would it not?

[Informationland]

It's simple, you break the rules, you get punished. I try my hardest to stay in line. I love the mods.

So do I, but I am still accustoming myself to the rules.

[Fartsniffage]

Thing is, you have all of these issues enforcing DOS's, and yet you still use it as a punishment.

We wouldn't call it "Delete On Sight" if our toolbox allowed us to ban them outright. We'd just go with the straight up ban from the start. As it is, all we can do is kill their nations and block what we can, when we can. I'd love to have RSP/IP (Remote Strangling Protocol over IP) for some of our more persistent assholes, but that technology is still years away. Seriously, short of sending someone to their house and smashing their keyboard hands with a hammer, somebody who wants to be an ass on the internet can continue to be an ass on the internet. If you've got better ideas, I'm all ears.

Sorry. I don't think you understood my point. DOS's are an imperfect solution to an issue due to the way the site is set up, banning deleted people from creating new nations for a while would also be an imperfect solution due to the same technical issues. What would be the material difference?

If someone creates a new nation and it's picked up then the new nation gets a ban with a message pointing towards the deletion message/post for the set term. If they don't get caught then well done them, perhaps they learned a bit of a lesson from the deletion and kept their heads down.

[Katganistan]

Sorry. I don't think you understood my point. DOS's are an imperfect solution to an issue due to the way the site is set up, banning deleted people from creating new nations for a while would also be an imperfect solution due to the same technical issues. What would be the material difference?

If someone creates a new nation and it's picked up then the new nation gets a ban with a message pointing towards the deletion message/post for the set term. If they don't get caught then well done them, perhaps they learned a bit of a lesson from the deletion and kept their heads down.

I don't see how this is materially different from what happens now, especially since with egregious cases posters ARE telegrammed and told not to post with any of their puppets until the original ban is up.

In other words, we do this already.

[Snowby]

I don't always agree with their rulings and sometimes I think they let people off the hook, but overall? The mods do a great job. Again, sometimes I disagree but overall they work to keep the forums in line and do a good job most of the time, kind of like the police.

[NERVUN]

We wouldn't call it "Delete On Sight" if our toolbox allowed us to ban them outright. We'd just go with the straight up ban from the start. As it is, all we can do is kill their nations and block what we can, when we can. I'd love to have RSP/IP (Remote Strangling Protocol over IP) for some of our more persistent assholes, but that technology is still years away. Seriously, short of sending someone to their house and smashing their keyboard hands with a hammer, somebody who wants to be an ass on the internet can continue to be an ass on the internet. If you've got better ideas, I'm all ears.

Sorry. I don't think you understood my point. DOS's are an imperfect solution to an issue due to the way the site is set up, banning deleted people from creating new nations for a while would also be an imperfect solution due to the same technical issues. What would be the material difference?

If someone creates a new nation and it's picked up then the new nation gets a ban with a message pointing towards the deletion message/post for the set term. If they don't get caught then well done them, perhaps they learned a bit of a lesson from the deletion and kept their heads down.

That's actually something we've talked about, the problem is a matter of how. I.e. IF someone has multiple nations that we know of we could send them a message with a ban, but not everyone falls into that category.

[Esternial]

I would prefer you don't hand out 1 day bans willy-nilly. Handing out more official warnings rather than knock-it-offs would be OK. Maybe more less-than-a-day bans if it looks like a usually-good poster has just lost their temper. A couple of hours is enough for someone to regain their composure without the nuisance of being banned for a whole day.

I think that if someone breaks the rules, they should get at least an official warning. Unofficial warnings and knock-it-offs shouldn't be used for rules violations.

One day bans could be a good deterrent to get the message across, especially when someone needs to take a moment to cool off.

I think they should become part of the Mod's quick response equipment for certain flaming/trolling offences, though they shouldn't carry a (much) greater weight to future punishments compared to an official warning. One day bans, in my own opinion, could be a useful alternative for warnings depending on the Mod's discretion. It's a good deterrent, but used poorly may cause a shitstorm for the Mod using it.

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

There should be thread ban and specific forum ban features.

[Esternial]

There should be thread ban and specific forum ban features.

May be hard to enforce that, code-wise.

If possible, a one (or a bit longer) hour ban would be brilliant. Good for giving people a time out instead of a warning, and not as long as a one-day ban.

[Shaggai]

I think that if someone breaks the rules, they should get at least an official warning. Unofficial warnings and knock-it-offs shouldn't be used for rules violations.

One day bans could be a good deterrent to get the message across, especially when someone needs to take a moment to cool off.

I think they should become part of the Mod's quick response equipment for certain flaming/trolling offences, though they shouldn't carry a (much) greater weight to future punishments compared to an official warning. One day bans, in my own opinion, could be a useful alternative for warnings depending on the Mod's discretion. It's a good deterrent, but used poorly may cause a shitstorm for the Mod using it.

If it's just a cool-off, a 1-hour or 6-hour ban is probably more useful.

Edit:

There should be thread ban and specific forum ban features.

May be hard to enforce that, code-wise.

If possible, a one (or a bit longer) hour ban would be brilliant. Good for giving people a time out instead of a warning, and not as long as a one-day ban.

Yes, they're possible. I believe they're actually part of the mod toolkit now, but they're just not used much.

[Cyrisnia]

There should be thread ban and specific forum ban features.

May be hard to enforce that, code-wise.

If possible, a one (or a bit longer) hour ban would be brilliant. Good for giving people a time out instead of a warning, and not as long as a one-day ban.

I second this.

[NERVUN]

There should be thread ban and specific forum ban features.

That would be very hard to actually do.

It IS possible, but it would be a nightmare given that is dealing with the permissions for the forum, right now only Reppy can actually do that and there's no automated system.

Now, supposedly, the code is changing all the time so if there is a new release we might have those tools in the pocket, but for right now...

[NERVUN]

One day bans could be a good deterrent to get the message across, especially when someone needs to take a moment to cool off.

I think they should become part of the Mod's quick response equipment for certain flaming/trolling offences, though they shouldn't carry a (much) greater weight to future punishments compared to an official warning. One day bans, in my own opinion, could be a useful alternative for warnings depending on the Mod's discretion. It's a good deterrent, but used poorly may cause a shitstorm for the Mod using it.

If it's just a cool-off, a 1-hour or 6-hour ban is probably more useful.

Probably, though as Fris has noted, the problem is catching.

[Esternial]

There should be thread ban and specific forum ban features.

That would be very hard to actually do.

It IS possible, but it would be a nightmare given that is dealing with the permissions for the forum, right now only Reppy can actually do that and there's no automated system.

Now, supposedly, the code is changing all the time so if there is a new release we might have those tools in the pocket, but for right now...

Or we clone Reppy and make the rest of the Mod team redundant *nod*

[The Blaatschapen]

That would be very hard to actually do.

It IS possible, but it would be a nightmare given that is dealing with the permissions for the forum, right now only Reppy can actually do that and there's no automated system.

Now, supposedly, the code is changing all the time so if there is a new release we might have those tools in the pocket, but for right now...

Or we clone Reppy and make the rest of the Mod team redundant *nod*

Sorry. There is only precedent to clone sheep.