Quantcast
The Moderator Thread

Forums - Website Topics - The Moderator Thread

Removing as in deleting from the mod history?

I like my old moderations there because they remind me of what kind of user I was and remind me of the old days.



Around the Network

I don't see the point. If you're considering the age of the moderation and the user's current actions as a moderation team, you're already effectively expunging old poor behavior from current moderation decisions, aren't you?



potato_hamster said:
I don't see the point. If you're considering the age of the moderation and the user's current actions as a moderation team, you're already effectively expunging old poor behavior from current moderation decisions, aren't you?

 No. As long as we can see them, and current behavior is like it, it's always considered in the decision to/not to/how to moderate.



                                                                                                                                            

CGI-Quality said:
potato_hamster said:
I don't see the point. If you're considering the age of the moderation and the user's current actions as a moderation team, you're already effectively expunging old poor behavior from current moderation decisions, aren't you?

 No. As long as we can see them, and current behavior is like it, it's always considered in the decision to/not to/how to moderate.

This actually explains a lot.

I find that pretty concerning and disheartening.  This is not good at all. You're actually discouraging users from trying to improve their behavior over time,since you, know what's the point of a toxic user turning over a new leaf and acting like a model poster if continuing on with toxic behavior that just barely skirts the rules results in the exact same moderation the next time (if any) they get in moderation trouble?

Then it seems to me that perhaps the easiest and best solution is to start considering such things when moderating. To be frank,I find it a bit surprising that such a common sense approach it isn't a factor already. It really, really should be. Users should be able to redeem themselves, learn from their mistakes, and the mere presence of an entry in a moderation history table shouldn't affect that. 



potato_hamster said:
CGI-Quality said:

 No. As long as we can see them, and current behavior is like it, it's always considered in the decision to/not to/how to moderate.

This actually explains a lot.

I find that pretty concerning and disheartening.  This is not good at all. You're actually discouraging users from trying to improve their behavior over time,since you, know what's the point of a toxic user turning over a new leaf and acting like a model poster if continuing on with toxic behavior that just barely skirts the rules results in the exact same moderation the next time (if any) they get in moderation trouble?

Then it seems to me that perhaps the easiest and best solution is to start considering such things when moderating. To be frank,I find it a bit surprising that such a common sense approach it isn't a factor already. It really, really should be. Users should be able to redeem themselves, learn from their mistakes, and the mere presence of an entry in a moderation history table shouldn't affect that. 

I might be wrong but I think that all CGI was saying was that if they see someone barely avoiding the ban system and showcasing the same behavior even long after their last ban, they may still ban them as if they were recently banned prior. Basically, if they act the exact same for a long time and just walk the line until they trip over it - there's still a possibility they'll be banned harshly. I don't think he was implying that the average user doesn't have their last ban date taken into account when moderating. I mean, that's why it's called the "progressive ban system". 

At least I think. 



Around the Network
potato_hamster said:
CGI-Quality said:

 No. As long as we can see them, and current behavior is like it, it's always considered in the decision to/not to/how to moderate.

This actually explains a lot.

I find that pretty concerning and disheartening.  This is not good at all. You're actually discouraging users from trying to improve their behavior over time,since you, know what's the point of a toxic user turning over a new leaf and acting like a model poster if continuing on with toxic behavior that just barely skirts the rules results in the exact same moderation the next time (if any) they get in moderation trouble?

Then it seems to me that perhaps the easiest and best solution is to start considering such things when moderating. To be frank,I find it a bit surprising that such a common sense approach it isn't a factor already. It really, really should be. Users should be able to redeem themselves, learn from their mistakes, and the mere presence of an entry in a moderation history table shouldn't affect that. 

I think you misunderstood, although we've always considered moderation history. What it doesn't mean, however, is that a 10-year-old moderation automatically guarantees you'll be moderated in the current time for the same thing. That is the point of the Progressive System. Should someone go moderation free (or specific moderation free) for an extended amount of time, said user won't have to follow the Progressive System. However, if you did something in June, and then in September, and then again in December, we would follow the Progressive.

And lots of posters have improved their behavior over time. The only folks who have seen continuous issue are those who have chosen not to improve, despite moderators working with them, offering light bans/Warnings and, since I joined, pushed for a PM system before tainting a clean user's history. Measures are in place to ensure abuse of the system doesn't happen (and, if it does, you'd send that issue over to myself or Ryuu96). What a user chooses to do with those things on the table is entirely up to them. 

Regarding the poll, the idea would be to expunge very old and/or light moderations. This would not include discrimination, abuse of staff, threats, or Alternate ID extended bans.


Edit: Alchy was on the right track.

Last edited by CGI-Quality - on 06 February 2019

                                                                                                                                            

CGI-Quality said:
potato_hamster said:

This actually explains a lot.

I find that pretty concerning and disheartening.  This is not good at all. You're actually discouraging users from trying to improve their behavior over time,since you, know what's the point of a toxic user turning over a new leaf and acting like a model poster if continuing on with toxic behavior that just barely skirts the rules results in the exact same moderation the next time (if any) they get in moderation trouble?

Then it seems to me that perhaps the easiest and best solution is to start considering such things when moderating. To be frank,I find it a bit surprising that such a common sense approach it isn't a factor already. It really, really should be. Users should be able to redeem themselves, learn from their mistakes, and the mere presence of an entry in a moderation history table shouldn't affect that. 

I think you misunderstood, although we've always considered moderation history. What it doesn't mean, however, is that a 10-year-old moderation automatically guarantees you'll be moderated in the current time for the same thing. That is the point of the Progressive System. Should someone go moderation free (or specific moderation free) for an extended amount of time, said user won't have to follow the Progressive System. However, if you did something in June, and then in September, and then again in December, we would follow the Progressive.

And lots of posters have improved their behavior over time. The only folks who have seen continuous issue are those who have chosen not to improve, despite moderators working with them, offering light bans/Warnings and, since I joined, pushed for a PM system before tainting a clean user's history. Measures are in place to ensure abuse of the system doesn't happen (and, if it does, you'd send that issue over to myself or Ryuu96). What a user chooses to do with those things on the table is entirely up to them. 

Regarding the poll, the idea would be to expunge very old and/or light moderations. This would not include discrimination, abuse of staff, threats, or Alternate ID extended bans.

my apologies fir the misunderstanding.



potato_hamster said:
CGI-Quality said:

~snip

my apologies fir the misunderstanding.

 No need to apologize. :)

This is why I reached out to the community. I already got moderator feedback, so I wanted to pick some brains here and get a feel for where everyone sits on this idea. 



                                                                                                                                            

No thank you, im still sad that the mod history before 2008 got cleared



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

It's not like old infractions have been taken into account for bans anyway. So I don't see the benefit of taking away useful information from mods.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.