As you stated, we'll see what the admins say.......

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=12357&Form.ShowMessage=1018240

A posting binge in my book is to post at several sites about the unfairness of one action or another on this or another site. It has nothing whatsoever to do with long threads in general - I am sorry if the concept was perceived unclearly. I can't quite see the relevance of the thread you refer to in this connection, but thank you for sharing - was very amusing to see Kev use verbiage (albeit an example) - usually never se him do that };-) ~S

This permanent ban thing is a waste of time anyway. The only people who can be really banned for good are merchants. Anyone who just wants to post gallery images and troll forums can sign on again as Joe Blow from Idaho and use a different Hotmail address. Only merchants have to give their real name and postal address (else they can't get paid). So the only ones that are got rid of permanently are those also making money for Rendo. Makes sense? No. m.

Well, they do track cloned accounts so unless the person is jumping from computer network to computer network, they are probably being tracked more closely than you think. The fact is that there is very little permanently deleted from this site. Deleted messages are still there. And so is the history of members, I suspect. If the record is there, it seems to me that it is quite reasonable to put a time limit .... good grief, even people who have committed major crimes are permitted to become citizens again after they have served their time. I know that the administrators and moderators have had a hard time with members who push and push and push the limits of the rules for no good reason than they think they are proving a point and usually the point is that they want things all their own way and they believe no one else should have any rights in the matter. That only results in people cemented into taking sides and the flame wars break out. I would not put spinner in this category as regards this request, by the way. And there are members who can't resist chasing down other members until they shove them off the forums and galleries. Why members get pleasure from such activity is beyond me, but then I don't understand hackers and virus creators either. But there should be some allowance (parole, if you will) for members who just got pushed so far that they felt as if they had to push back. I've been there. So have a lot of us. To be banned because one felt harrassed or because they stood on a principle important to them seems a sad thing...especially if one has tried to change their behavior (I just refuse to read messages from certain individuals and that's lowered my blood pressure considerably), cool down the rhetoric. Perhaps some official statement will come out in the next day or two. I hope that the administrators are discussing in their board room today.

"The admins should allow themselves some room for individual judgements on a case-by-case basis. The admins need to have some leeway for discretionary actions."

The Admins/Mods have this leeway already: At any time, they can forgo the usual process and outright ban someone if they determine the actions warrant it.

The warnings, IMHO, are for Members who have not crossed the "instant ban" line and deserve a chance at proving themselves. Therefore, it seems reasonable to me that, after they have proven they can "play nice", the lesson is learned and the warning should be removed.

It's been 3 days since spinner's request on clarification and reasoning and no response from admin/staff yet?

The Admins/Mods have this leeway already: At any time, they can forgo the usual process and outright ban someone if they determine the actions warrant it. The warnings, IMHO, are for Members who have not crossed the "instant ban" line and deserve a chance at proving themselves. Therefore, it seems reasonable to me that, after they have proven they can "play nice", the lesson is learned and the warning should be removed. Not all actions warrant instant banning; neither do all situations warrant long-term leniency. Some problems fall in the middle. Thus......a need for flexibility.

But none of us are advocating rigidity - so I don't quite understand where you are coming from in this context ? To reiterate: 1) Why no reset? 2) Would it be possible to reconsider? 3) Would Varian's suggestion be a feasible start on implementing a new process ? Would you please point out where you perceive the questions asked or solutions proposed to be rigid and exclude a normal parameter for flexibility ? ~S

After X amount of time, a warning should be expired. This happens with traffic violations, just as an example. In some states, if you go long enough without a violation, it's permanently removed from your record, with no trace of it ever having existed. I've also heard of systems where a violation is automatically expired after X amount of time unless you get another within a certain time from the first one, in which case the previous violation stays longer, and if you get enough violations accumulated, you lose your license. I suspect that this sort of "expiring vilation" system is what people have been suggesting. It's a means by which people can "clear their record" with good behavior and in which repeated bad behavior is only tolerated for just so long... I fair to see how this would be in any way unfair. If anything, it's fairer than the current "once warned, always warned" system. Still, I've been waiting to hear from any admin on this matter. Surely SOMEONE is listening... ? bonni

They're discussing it - which is all I know, so again, if I as the thread initiator don't have an issue with waiting for a reply within -reasonable- limits after it's been a weekend, I don't see why others should be so bothered over it. I mean - at work it's sometimes taken us up to gasp two weeks, even more to come to an agreement with all the team over a process that wasn't working - I dont see this as any different, but that's just me, or maybe a Scandinavian thing, we don't do the instant gratification thing here much. Thank you for clarifying all our posts in such an insightful manner. ~S

I like this one. I think it brings up some very good points. The whole idea of warnings afterall, is to try and teach one not to break the rules. 99% of the time, it works as it should, 1% of the time we have to take harder action. So, you all feel that warnings should be removed after time? I can bring this to the rest of the admin and see what they think. Spike

Yeehawww Spike............

Would you please point out where you perceive the questions asked or solutions proposed to be rigid and exclude a normal parameter for flexibility ?

We don't have any major disagreements here, spinner.

Nor do I consider any of the suggestions which I have seen in this thread to be unreasonable.

However, if I were running things, I would always leave myself with an opening in the TOS for the handling of "special cases". Not all situations can be handled in the same way. There are simply too many variables which enter into the equation.

[[[One small problem with this picture. I don't run things around here. So, it's all up to those who actually do. Thus, any points which I have made are nothing more than suggestions.]]]

I refer you to my post #49. No need for me to re-state myself.

As I mentioned earlier -- you have approached this matter in a very reasonable manner.

And who can ask for more than that?

Thanks, Spike. I figured someone was around to see these suggestions. :-) bonni

So, you all feel that warnings should be removed after time? Yep, yep :D

Post edited: But of course... (edit - this is a response to elizabyte's post, not jumpy's) Thanks Spike, keep us posted :-)

If not removed...downgraded to a minor scrape...maybe probation is a good model...even that ends eventually...

I agree that most of the time the warnings should reset. I hope that people will understand the idea behind it and not start a round of favoritism accusations: Why did spinner get this? Why couldn't I have gotten it x days/months/years ago? That said, I think that the admins and mods should be prepared to look at other cases if people bring up their banning due to individual TOS violations over a long stretch of time and make decisions on a case-by-case basis.

Again, if they do decide to impliment this, please allow for admin and mod discretion. There is that .001% that continually hover at the border of TOS violation - unjustly provoking others while staying just inside the TOS and causing a lot of nastiness. It might take several months, or even a year or so, for them to slip up badly enough to rack up the 3 violations for banning, even if privately everyone was hoping they'd be TOSsed out much sooner. For perpetual troublemakers, I think the resets should be not be automatic.

Just my 2 cents - which is probably only worth 1.5 as I'm brain dead right now and can't write my way into a paper bag, let alone out of one. ;-)

Cres - who has seen both sides of this issue up close. :)

Crescent -- I agree.

Again: If you let most of this be handled by a -process- and -automate- it, like i.e Varian's outline, you'll avoid most of the favouritism accusations. As for perpetual troublemakers; you take care of THOSE by having them slip up once too often on a ToS violation and then you throw the book at them and can keep them on a short leash. *shrug - I really don't understand this perpetual need to repeat the obvious by people, but again, maybe there are things here I am simply just not getting. Spike - What do the mods and admins say ? ~S

I think warnings should be removed after time...otherwise it's not fair. Work out a system that works :) your driving license does, so can Redo

We are still talking about this.... It's very deep....

It's good to know it is still be discussed. Thanks, Spike.

Still working on it...... This is a bigger issue than most and we want to see all sides of it before we jump one way or the other.

Spike, thank you very much for the updates. It's really good to know it hasn't been "shelved" or anything. ;-) bonni

actually you gallery does not get deleted if you are banned

Neither do your posts. I don't see a problem here - if you want to get the gallery deleted after a ban - just ask for it, I know they delete them on demand. ta for the updates, Spike :-) ~S

oh no, i was just saying... cause someone said they did, and they dont... nm...

Ok, Here is what we are going to do. Warnings will stay on the record for record keeping. However, they will be reviewed by the review board when requested by the member after 6 month. If the review board agrees that the strike should be removed, we will remove it. If the voilation is a major one (Copyright issues, major trolling...etc...), it might not be removed. It will be a case by case review. When we issue a new warning, we will review the members records at that time and remove old strikes as needed. We feel this is a fair way to go and hope it works out for all of you. Thanks Spike

reviewed when the user asks??? oh boy....

Yes, because with a database this size it would probably take a full-time person just to go through and keep it up to date... The important part is that Spike said "When we issue a new warning, we will review the members records at that time and remove old strikes as needed." so nobody will be unjustly penalised. Kev.

Hey, its a start and better than the "nothing's gonna change" you were so very eager to point out, Khai. Spike - could you please outline the procedure when it comes to the review board ? Is this a "set" set of mods, or will this be arbitrary ? Who's the contact point for such a review or removal request ? You ? Thanks for the update and at least easing up on the three is all you have forever thing :-) So.... when are you guys going to switch to Oracle ? ;-) ~S

Sounds like a great step in a very fair direction. Thanks Spike (and staff). :)

You can send your review request to any of the staff. I suggest sending it to one of the mods or me. The mods and admin will be the review board. Just fire off a IM to me or one of the mods and we will take it from there. Thanks Spike

"Yes, because with a database this size it would probably take a full-time person just to go through and keep it up to date..."

From a technical standpoint, you could have the database do it on it's own at scheduled times by various means; not so much as requiring any human intervention at all once the code is in place. In fact, it would be less resource-intensive than running the Marketplace or the Forums.

However, a step forward is a step forward.