After 2 months of someone being banned, automaticly 1 warning will be taken off the users account. If the person did not receive another warning the following month in its entire the second warning fill fall off the account and so on. Until all the warnings are cleared. However should that person receive enough warnings, another ban will be issued. The difference being that when its time for a warning to fall off this time the amount will be doubled, so instead if the first time it would take 1 month it will now take 2 months and so on for a warning to be removed. This should be a automated system.
What are some thought and feedbacks on if this should be implemented? And concerns on how it could affect the relevant current cases, like Phizzy being banned?
Personally I think its a little steep; its pretty much assessing a 1 Warning = 1 Month Ban kind of system, albeit with some delay. I think while it has some good intentions, its better to simple put some trust into the moderators and give them the leeway to decide when to ban/unban people, rather then make them adhere to arbitrary deadlines. If a person gets a warning for posting a single swear word in a thread, should that merit a month or more of ban? And if a person posts a trojan on the site plus a phishing site and spams the forums all in one go, should that only be worth a month? Likewise I think another problem is that it seems awfully tailored to rubbing in a ban against people who would otherwise simply make a new account and post. For example, if someone got a month ban for the aforementioned swear, and then came back and swore again 3 months later, it would be a total of something like 7 months before hes unbanned, over a teensy little matter.
Listen. I respect the work you put into this site, but I'm not going to "Respect your authoritah". I've been kliking as long as anyone. I've been programming since long before TDC existed, and I'll be programming long after TDC stops existing. I am on here for one reason and one reason only, and that is to help out people with their coding. I am here to help the noobies figure out how to use global values. I am not here to put up with asshattery. Phizzy is one of the few people that got up and actually helped out people with their coding problems, like so many people here are too lazy to do. And then one of the only other people thats actively helping besides me, gets banned because of trivial personal differences other asshats have with him. In short, you simply shouldn't be banning people over this trivial crap. There are too many redeeming qualities, too many good things to justify locking someone out whos doing more to help then all the forum trolls that push the line.
I respect what you've done for TDC, but I don't respect you any further then that, if you're going to stop people from helping newbies out. Phizzy has posted more examples and engines then most of the rest of us combined, and can't even post the rest of his because of his bans. And I am NOT putting up with that bullshit when I'm cruising the code-it forum trying to help people. I don't give a damn left or right about the drama you guys make in the forums, I want Phizzy unbanned because hes doing the one thing that actually matters. And thats the problem with the ban system we've got right now. If banning is left up to the discretion of the mods, you better damn well hope the mods have good discretion.
I'm not stopping anyone from helping anyone, I'm simply trying to stop arguments constantly filling and quite frankly ruining these forums. I'm sick to the teeth of it, if you want to start and argument with someone, do it else where; It's not welcome here.
Anything I lock/delete/ban is purely for the advatage of the majority of users who just want a friendly environment, constant flaming, flooding, and general crap like the post I locked a few minutes ago is not a positive addition to the site; It helps nobody, and quite frankly drives people away from how hostile some of those posts sound.
Now please get back onto topic, constructive conversation about the topic please, anything else, keep it out of here.
A single incident doesn't result in a ban, multiple offenses do. A single swear isn't likely to get you a warning, but if you keep doing, then yeah you'll get a warning. It takes 3 or 5 warning to get a ban.
Bottom line, you follow the rules, you have nothing to worry about. If you constantly and consitantly break the rules, we'll ban you. Signing up with other accounts during your ban period isn't a clean slate; it's grouds for having that account banned and a further ban being placed on your original account.
Is there anyone in the code-it forums with more problems unsolved than usual, because Phizzy isn't there? No, they're all doing just fine.
What's more - the only reason Phizzy seems to help out so much - is because he always gets there first. He's always online, so he's going to be able to reply quicker than others. You have no argument there Pixeltheif.
Originally Posted by Tim, the cat. Is there anyone in the code-it forums with more problems unsolved than usual, because Phizzy isn't there? No, they're all doing just fine.
What's more - the only reason Phizzy seems to help out so much - is because he always gets there first. He's always online, so he's going to be able to reply quicker than others. You have no argument there Pixeltheif.
Ur right Tim, I've been posting in the code-it forum twice as much.
Originally Posted by Knudde (Shab) Yeah, you're right, it IS good thinking. Who'd have thought that we'd want the rules enforced?
Cool, and since I've posted plenty more objectional little pixels lately, and have flagrantly violated several of the rules, and have absolutely no remorse and no qualms about say reposting this thread if it gets locked again, I suppose that means you have to ban me too? Or I have I not rubbed your rhubarb the wrong way yet, unlike Phizzy?
Your problem Shab, is that you're forgetting the rules are in there to serve the TDC members, not vice versa.
And they do, until someone goes around (Not breaking the rules BTW) and continues posting things like this, only to cause disruption in the community.
If I didn't respect the rules, I'd have banned/silenced you a long time ago; Phizzy even encouraged me to do it yesterday. Sad as it is, you can keep posting these topics because it's not against the rules.
Originally Posted by Tim, the cat. Is there anyone in the code-it forums with more problems unsolved than usual, because Phizzy isn't there? No, they're all doing just fine.
What's more - the only reason Phizzy seems to help out so much - is because he always gets there first. He's always online, so he's going to be able to reply quicker than others. You have no argument there Pixeltheif.
Actually he does. Newbies get help quicker with Phizzy around, you just said it yourself.
Originally Posted by Pixelthief Cool, and since I've posted plenty more objectional little pixels lately, and have flagrantly violated several of the rules, and have absolutely no remorse and no qualms about say reposting this thread if it gets locked again, I suppose that means you have to ban me too? Or I have I not rubbed your rhubarb the wrong way yet, unlike Phizzy?
Uh... Actually Shab and Phizzy are friendly outside of TDC. It's a joint admin decision to have him banned.
- Ok, you must admit that was the most creative cussing this site have ever seen -
Shab: "Sad as it is, you can keep posting these topics because it's not against the rules."
I'm not so sure.
Rule 3:
"Users should not engage in disruptive activity such as flooding (sending multiple messages within a short space of time). This will result in your profile being removed, and a permanent ban being enforced."
It would be interesting to know the opinions of others here. Do threads like this qualify as 'disruptive'? Would you say that the sometimes daily reposting of the same topic (sometimes, as in this case, an almost exact copy) counts as 'within a short space of time'?
Comments like having 'flagrantly violated several of the rules, and having absolutely no remorse and no qualms about say reposting this thread if it gets locked again' are in my opinion pretty disruptive.
And I do recall hearing the phrase 'stop flooding the forum with these threads'. It's food for thought...
Worse still, I fail to see the purpose of these threads. They're purportedly about discussion, but there's never any suggestion that Pixel might actually agree with anyone. It just keeps being reposted until Pixel gets what he wants.
And to boot, he calls everyone else childish. Go figure.
Um, these topics aren't really flooding.
They appear to be a genuine attempt at discussing various site related issues. However the choice of topic and the posts that follow are worse than the fact Pixeltheif keeps creating them.
If we could just stop getting at each others throats over minor differences of opinion then there would be no problem at all.
Originally Posted by Pixelthief If you didn't notice, hes also been submitting bucketloads of engines, examples, and coding downloads, as well as donating to keep TDC afloat.
The poor guy. Well, maybe he can bring his joyous spirit and generous time and donations to a community that he doesn't ironically destroy, the more he tries to keep it 'afloat'.
If I or Adam or someone would've been such an irritating pestilence like this we'd get a ban no doubt... I don't know why the rules don't apply to you, but you've done well to avoid being banned for all of this, really.
Just to reiterate, there was lots of sarcasm there. I just find you funny now Pixeltheif That said, I'm not posting any more on this now. I'll let your voice fade into the sad, unimportant depths of illogical doom. To be 'seen and not heard' as it were, I guess
OK, well I dunno about the rest of you, but I'm gonna have a bash at getting back on track.
Pixel's questions were: "What are some thought and feedbacks on if this should be implemented? And concerns on how it could affect the relevant current cases, like Phizzy being banned?"
I think Rikus' proposed method is a bit complicated. A community is made up of individuals, which leads to the situation Pixel has been pointing out. On the one hand, Phizzy was a useful, active community member. But on the other hand, he could act very irresponsibly.
You can't handle that with a system, in my opinion. You need several personalities, who know the community, know the good and bad points of the individual in question, and can make an informed group decision.
In programming terms, it's a fuzzy-logic problem. There's too much grey to have a one-size-fits-all ban system.
I would personally recommend leaving things up to Admin/Mod group judgement. Any mod would be able to ban someone there and then (e.g. spammer turns up, starts flooding the forums, needs to be removed within the hour, only one mod is online).
However, they would need to explain their decision on the admin forums, citing any threads or DC Mail messages as evidence. The other mods would then all (or as many as could be found) decide on the extent of the ban (a week, a few months, forever, or pending later review). Due to the thread-based nature of these discussions, an old thread could be resurrected if an admin comes on later and disagrees.
This would help to maintain the individuality of banning - respecting the fact that people are all different.
Also, the ability to restict access to certain parts of the site. So in the case of Phizzy, if he had blotted his copybook in the misc/general/dailyclick forums, the admins may decide to temporarily ban him from these forums WHILE allowing him to use Code It and the review/article/download features.
That would enable someone in this position to continue contributing whilst still suffering some kind of restriction. And show their attitude. If they then spam on Code It, a full ban becomes more easily justifiable.
So that's how I see it. Keep the uniqueness by having all bans/reproof based on individual judgements, and just add the ability to customise the scope of bans. Ideally add a 'restrictions' feature to withhold certain privileges whilst maintaining others.
I think that'd work fine
Edited by the Author.
191 / 9999 * 7 + 191 * 7
Deleted User
5th March, 2008 at 17:51:41 -
Originally Posted by Knudde (Shab) If I didn't respect the rules, I'd have banned/silenced you a long time ago; Phizzy even encouraged me to do it yesterday.
omg dude I totally told you to ban everyone, don't inflate or pasteurise the truth!
you know, I agree with pretty much everything Dines said; if we need to change the ban system, while Rikus has a fairly good idea, its not exactly applicable on TDC, as with our small clientsize we'd need something more flexible, not more rigid, so leaving bans up to the discretion of the moderators, while giving them greater freedom to ban from specific PARTS of the site, rather then the whole thing at all
It seems to me that there's a split between whoever wants the Phizzy back and who doesn't. And that's bad. Maybe you should allow him back for a while on trial, see if he does anything bad, then act on him. Or maybe you've already done that, I dunno, I'm new. If you have already done that, and he did bad shit again, just ban him, he's not worth it.
Originally Posted by Steve Hallam Who is this Phizzy guy?
It seems to me that there's a split between whoever wants the Phizzy back and who doesn't. And that's bad. Maybe you should allow him back for a while on trial, see if he does anything bad, then act on him. Or maybe you've already done that, I dunno, I'm new. If you have already done that, and he did bad shit again, just ban him, he's not worth it.
That's my 2p anyway.
If you've been warned your whole life about how doing something will give you life in prison and you do it anyway, continue getting warnings, and continue doing it, then you're going to jail. Whats the differences here? The fact that Phizzy's life sentence was in fact revoked for a second chance, but he continued to do it. So what do I say? Everyone stfu and let it the hell go.
Life imprisonment? Say you'd get that for murder, what would be the equivalent in TDC terms? Hacking the site and deleting members from the database? I'm pretty sure I haven't done anything worthy of BANFOREVER.
And I don't think people really do the 'You shoplifted AGAIN!? That's it! PREPARE THE GUILLOTINE!' thing any more.
But yeah, that's why I think the idea of limited restrictions would be a good one, rather than a full on ban. Because if the admins had a certain issue with your use of one aspect of the site, they could impost restrictions rather than a full on ban.
Like limiting how many posts/threads could be made per day, forcing you to have an 'I've been a nortee boyeee' avatar, or blocking access to some of the forums but not others. That kinda stuff.
Basically, people get sent to jail for life if they get caught on pot possession 3 times in a row. Its by far the worst law system in the entire united states, which is really an accomplishment.
Btw if you read that article carefully, someone actually DID get 25 to life for shoplifting. And not only that, but the supreme court upheld it 5-4
"Some unusual scenarios have arisen, particularly in California — the state punishes shoplifting and similar crimes as felony petty theft if the person who committed the crime has a prior conviction for any form of theft, including robbery or burglary. As a result, some defendants have been given sentences of 25 years to life in prison for such crimes as shoplifting golf clubs (Gary Ewing, previous strikes for burglary and robbery with a knife), nine videotapes (Leandro Andrade, previous strikes for home burglary), or, along with a violent assault, a slice of pepperoni pizza from a group of children (Jerry Dewayne Williams, four previous non-violent felonies, sentence later reduced to six years). In one particularly notorious case, Kevin Weber was sentenced to 26 years to life for the crime of stealing four chocolate chip cookies (previous strikes of burglary and assault with a deadly weapon).[8] However, prosecutors said the six-time parole violator broke into the restaurant to rob the safe after a busy Mother's Day holiday, but he triggered the alarm system before he could do it. When arrested, his pockets were full of cookies he had taken from the restaurant.[9]"
The point behind what I said was not to compare what Phizzy was doing, to any sort of laws. So how about you both stop trying to twist my words around, eh? Fact of the matter is, when you get banned for doing something, that's all fine and good.. people deserve second chances. So go so far as to keep handing out chances just so they can be butchered, that is the part you guys seem to be completely missing. No matter how bad something you do is, if you've been constantly warned to stop doing something, and you have complete control over it... STOP doing it! Don't be a dumb ass, because chances are you're not being punished for what you did, but for the fact that you're just being an idiot. You gain nothing but mild humor by doing the crap you do Phizzy, mild humor that can easily be taken to a place where people care, which is not here. Sometimes I think the only reason you do get any humor here is simply because you have so many people to get smart with whenever they disagree.
Its good rhetoric, but when it boils down you're saying permaban someone for repeated minor offenses. And that IS the same thing as sending a guy to prison for 50-life for stealing a slice of pepperoni pizza. More sanely would be; DO KEEP handing out the chances, just do it after a fair ban for every offense. So if Phizzy decides to come back and plaster the site with lemonparties, ban him again for 6 months. And if he decides to come back after those 6 months, give him that chance. Because maybe that time it won't be to vex and flummox us all. Recidivist rules are inherently flawed in that they don't allow for rehabilitation, and the exact same applies here. Once a mans done his time, you let him out.
Originally Posted by Pixelthief Its good rhetoric, but when it boils down you're saying permaban someone for repeated minor offenses. And that IS the same thing as sending a guy to prison for 50-life for stealing a slice of pepperoni pizza. More sanely would be; DO KEEP handing out the chances, just do it after a fair ban for every offense. So if Phizzy decides to come back and plaster the site with lemonparties, ban him again for 6 months. And if he decides to come back after those 6 months, give him that chance. Because maybe that time it won't be to vex and flummox us all. Recidivist rules are inherently flawed in that they don't allow for rehabilitation, and the exact same applies here. Once a mans done his time, you let him out.
There is where one might argue that the admins have a fucken life and would much rather be here at the site enjoying what little they have to do to keep it up, then to constantly warn some guy to stfu or else he's going to get banned again. Seriously, you're fighting a losing battle Pixelthief, your analogies don't make sense, so again... just stop and like everyone else seems to be insisted, let it go!
There is where one might argue that the admins have a ****en life and would much rather be here at the site enjoying what little they have to do to keep it up, then to constantly warn some guy to st*u or else he's going to get banned again. Seriously, you're fighting a losing battle Pixelthief, your analogies don't make sense, so again... just stop and like everyone else seems to be insisted, let it go!
Which of course goes back to the oldfashioned debate tactic of saying "I'm right you're wrong give up plz". So I'll try my best to derive your argument from that drivel; You seem to be saying something along the lines of that the moderators are too strained for time to deal with the forum drama. This was the exact reason I said we should postpone any of this until after the Xmas compo results were in. But in that same vein, how is re-banning phizzy every other day, and deleting/locking the numerous threads that will pop up because of it, and dealing with forumers like yourself abusing other ones, easier then just letting the man go unbanned? How does increased punishment consume less time then leniency? It increases the moderators workload to HAVE him banned, due to the inexorable eventualities. I'm going to make these threads, you're going to swear, and Shab/Clubby are going to lock them, and the cycle repeats. The idea that it is easier to just keep Phizzy banned is hence just bad logic.
Thats assuming thats the point you're trying to come across with. If you're really just trying to hammer in a "Zomg pixelthoof plz give up plz! STFU AND DIE!!!!1@!1!one11!" point, I'll respond with a simple "I am rubber you are glue, anything you say bounces off me and sticks to you"
But if you're going to keep reposting these threads irrespective of what anyone else says, then isn't the whole "I'm right you're wrong give up plz" coming from you? Cos these posts are just gonna continue until everyone agrees with you for a quiet life, aren't they?
And let's look at your argument for a minute; It's largely based on statements that certain conduct "doesn't merit a ban". I've seen very few explanations as to why, and what's given is hardly convincing. If you want people to agree with you, it's best to be right. You seem to be having a hard time proving to the rest of the world that you are.
That of itself could tell you something, if you'd let it.
Well said Dines, your posts Pixelthief, are contradicting your arrangement slightly. Actually more so supporting the opposing idea your trying to put down, which is your cliche "I'm Right, you're wrong."
I am in no way trying to say "I'm right, you're wrong." I am merely saying that what you're implying is not wrong, but out of date. Perhaps if what you were saying, was said when he was banned the first or second time, then yeah, I'd agree. However since you're trying to get him off the hook again, after being banned how many times... I think you just need to rest.
There is where one might argue that the admins have a ****en life and would much rather be here at the site enjoying what little they have to do to keep it up, then to constantly warn some guy to st*u or else he's going to get banned again. Seriously, you're fighting a losing battle Pixelthief, your analogies don't make sense, so again... just stop and like everyone else seems to be insisted, let it go!
Which of course goes back to the oldfashioned debate tactic of saying "I'm right you're wrong give up plz". So I'll try my best to derive your argument from that drivel; You seem to be saying something along the lines of that the moderators are too strained for time to deal with the forum drama. This was the exact reason I said we should postpone any of this until after the Xmas compo results were in. But in that same vein, how is re-banning phizzy every other day, and deleting/locking the numerous threads that will pop up because of it, and dealing with forumers like yourself abusing other ones, easier then just letting the man go unbanned? How does increased punishment consume less time then leniency? It increases the moderators workload to HAVE him banned, due to the inexorable eventualities. I'm going to make these threads, you're going to swear, and Shab/Clubby are going to lock them, and the cycle repeats. The idea that it is easier to just keep Phizzy banned is hence just bad logic.
Thats assuming thats the point you're trying to come across with. If you're really just trying to hammer in a "Zomg pixelthoof plz give up plz! STFU AND DIE!!!!1@!1!one11!" point, I'll respond with a simple "I am rubber you are glue, anything you say bounces off me and sticks to you"
Because America doesn't negotiate with terrorists!
With or without these topics. Phiz is not going to be banned forever, we will unban him at some point as a trial, but its not going to be now because of his recent fake membership and rude postings 2 weeks ago. So pixel let this go for now be assured phiz is not banned forever but we can't unban him right now because of his latest actions. All the admins agree on this. Give it time, you should see him coming back at some point. Sooner rather then later but again this will be as a trial. Closing this AnD any future topics on this subject enough is enough. We got the point. There is nothing normal left to say about this.
Edited by an Administrator.
Be sure to follow us on the twitters for the latest and greatest: @dailyclick
Advertisement
Edited by the Author.
Apocalyptic Coders - 
That said, I'm not posting any more on this now. I'll let your voice fade into the sad, unimportant depths of illogical doom. To be 'seen and not heard' as it were, I guess 
