FAO: davegtt's infractor
11 January 2008, 03:36 PM
#61
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Zed Ess Won Hay Tee
Posts: 21,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
11 January 2008, 07:39 PM
#66
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: RIP Tam.
Posts: 5,108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just seen this thread, yes my head was in a cave 
I myself think the infraction system is abused alot reading the threads on here as much as I do, it seems that a lot of power can be gained from just a simple membership, after all £5 £10 £15 is only a small price to pay to be able to infract people for the sake of it
At the end of the day you give some of these 'children' the power they cannot handle it and it goes to their heads.
I hope these power crazy people get a life and grow up as it will be such a shame to spoil the site now it has new owners.
I myself think the infraction system is abused alot reading the threads on here as much as I do, it seems that a lot of power can be gained from just a simple membership, after all £5 £10 £15 is only a small price to pay to be able to infract people for the sake of it
At the end of the day you give some of these 'children' the power they cannot handle it and it goes to their heads.
I hope these power crazy people get a life and grow up as it will be such a shame to spoil the site now it has new owners.
11 January 2008, 08:37 PM
#68
It is all complete tosh in my book....the sooner we get a more forward thinking and pro-active moderating team onboard, lose the infraction system (but keep the instant ban feature and lengthen it) and stop all this crap, then SN will become a much better place.
11 January 2008, 09:16 PM
#71
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: A big town with sh1t shops: Northampton
Posts: 21,366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would they care? They'd just set up a new username. It's not like they'd have a reputation or post count to protect...
11 January 2008, 09:23 PM
#72
the more clever trolls (or so they think) just use various programs that mask your Ip address and then register with different email address's. Al this has been covered in detail by simon many times.
they know who are the serial trollers, they just choose to ignore them and advise us to as well.
they know who are the serial trollers, they just choose to ignore them and advise us to as well.
11 January 2008, 09:26 PM
#73
Fair point, but some users do seem to have come on under a new name, whilst banned,for example, and stayed in line until they've reached the magic 25 and then reverted back to their old ways. Maybe lengthening the instant ban period would help in this case.
11 January 2008, 09:46 PM
#74
Scooby Regular
The line between banter and a wind-up is a very fine one ...... I should know, I live on it most of the time
What is annoying is the Infraction Police who have taken their idea of what the site needs to be as the model - anything outside of that model needs to be stamped upon, and is by this judgement group - the Infraction system has given power to this group.
They probably genuinely think they are doing right, but it flies against the wishes of the majority and thats what makes it a pain.
Some Infractors just Infract to cause trouble ..... even paying for multiple accounts to do so too!
What is annoying is the Infraction Police who have taken their idea of what the site needs to be as the model - anything outside of that model needs to be stamped upon, and is by this judgement group - the Infraction system has given power to this group.
They probably genuinely think they are doing right, but it flies against the wishes of the majority and thats what makes it a pain.
Some Infractors just Infract to cause trouble ..... even paying for multiple accounts to do so too!
11 January 2008, 09:53 PM
#75
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Somewhere in Kent, sniffing some V-Power
Posts: 15,029
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pete, I genuinely believe that the infraction system has done many users, a lot of good. 
It's not difficult to use a forum without insulting people at the drop of hat. 
:
It's just a shame that some tw&ts are now abusing it.
I have dished out two infractions and they were for two blatant trolls that only joined to fling abuse.
I'd to see others admit to this awful sin!
It's not difficult to use a forum without insulting people at the drop of hat. :It's just a shame that some tw&ts are now abusing it.
I have dished out two infractions and they were for two blatant trolls that only joined to fling abuse.
I'd to see others admit to this awful sin!
Last edited by Gear Head; 11 January 2008 at 09:56 PM.
11 January 2008, 09:57 PM
#76
Which is sad. I can't honestly understand why someone thinks throwing around infractions for banter and such like serves any real purpose. Fair enough, in cases where insults are being dealt out, but if a thread isn't really out and out insulting, and a person doesn't like it, don't have anything to do with it.
I have never given an infraction, but if I've felt strongly about something being said, I will simply reply with my view. I'm not expecting anyone to necessarily agree with me, but at least I've said my bit. I can't see what good it would do to infract, without any reasoning behind it.
I have never given an infraction, but if I've felt strongly about something being said, I will simply reply with my view. I'm not expecting anyone to necessarily agree with me, but at least I've said my bit. I can't see what good it would do to infract, without any reasoning behind it.
11 January 2008, 10:16 PM
#78
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Somewhere in Kent, sniffing some V-Power
Posts: 15,029
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just noticed that I have received my first infraction!
All for saying that 'sy' was a bit silly for signing 25% of his company over to his polish girl-friend, being fleaced and then continuing to speak with the sister.
I'm with you guys, infractors should be made public!
All for saying that 'sy' was a bit silly for signing 25% of his company over to his polish girl-friend, being fleaced and then continuing to speak with the sister.
I'm with you guys, infractors should be made public!
11 January 2008, 10:32 PM
#79
Scooby Regular
I've just had an idea - what if the Infractor who's infraction results in the banning of a member, being named?
If someone has 4 points, they 'should' tread carefully - thus curbing the poster ..... that would achieve the purpose of the system.
The banning infraction would only be given where the infractor feels they could stand up to that infraction ...... thus making it more likely to be justified.
When you are banned all you can do is use the 'Contact Us' on SN - as I know, that means of contact is not picked up ...... so, it drives you to create a new account just to post an unjustified infraction post!
If someone has 4 points, they 'should' tread carefully - thus curbing the poster ..... that would achieve the purpose of the system.
The banning infraction would only be given where the infractor feels they could stand up to that infraction ...... thus making it more likely to be justified.
When you are banned all you can do is use the 'Contact Us' on SN - as I know, that means of contact is not picked up ...... so, it drives you to create a new account just to post an unjustified infraction post!
11 January 2008, 10:40 PM
#80
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Somewhere in Kent, sniffing some V-Power
Posts: 15,029
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've just had an idea - what if the Infractor who's infraction results in the banning of a member, being named?
If someone has 4 points, they 'should' tread carefully - thus curbing the poster ..... that would achieve the purpose of the system.
The banning infraction would only be given where the infractor feels they could stand up to that infraction ...... thus making it more likely to be justified.
When you are banned all you can do is use the 'Contact Us' on SN - as I know, that means of contact is not picked up ...... so, it drives you to create a new account just to post an unjustified infraction post!
If someone has 4 points, they 'should' tread carefully - thus curbing the poster ..... that would achieve the purpose of the system.
The banning infraction would only be given where the infractor feels they could stand up to that infraction ...... thus making it more likely to be justified.
When you are banned all you can do is use the 'Contact Us' on SN - as I know, that means of contact is not picked up ...... so, it drives you to create a new account just to post an unjustified infraction post!
11 January 2008, 11:02 PM
#82
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From reading all the above posts all it seems, in my opinion, to illustrate is that we all have different points of view. In 'real life' we are not allowed to behave in a vigilante type manner. In fact defending our own property is likely to lead us to being arrested rather than the burglar. So how can it work 'fairly' if we are allowed to act in a vigilante type way on here. Whether it be PSL or davegtt or whoever - it does seem that once one has jumped on them others jump on the collective bandwagon and deliberately get them banned. It is difficult to see most times what has offended the infractor - well what has offended them more about that particular post over the other 20 in exactly the same vein except perhaps the name of the poster.
I rarely stick my head above the wall this high - and usually get infracted when I do..........I do not l like the infraction system. But no I do not have a solution either.
I rarely stick my head above the wall this high - and usually get infracted when I do..........I do not l like the infraction system. But no I do not have a solution either.
11 January 2008, 11:18 PM
#85
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: It's like finding a cocktail sausage, when what you really wanted was a rather large saveloy.
Posts: 20,535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Infractions seem to be like kids being given sweets in a candy store - people are OD on them, and it's spoiling the SN atmosphere..
If there is a justifiable reason for handing out an infraction then there is no problem.
If someone is just doing it to remove another user they don't particuarly like then it's clear something stinks..
Make infractors public! If someone has a genuine, solid reason to infract, they shouldnt mind being named..
If there is a justifiable reason for handing out an infraction then there is no problem.
If someone is just doing it to remove another user they don't particuarly like then it's clear something stinks..
Make infractors public! If someone has a genuine, solid reason to infract, they shouldnt mind being named..
11 January 2008, 11:29 PM
#87
Scooby Regular
I think it would work well - if the Infracted member are really bad despite 4 points, then they deserve a few days ban to reflect.
As it is, I could have been banned for my comment which received an infraction on this very thread (infraction reversed) had I been on 4 points - with no way of getting it reversed ............... which shows that the banning Infraction should have a higher cost to the Infractor if they misjudge the feeling of the Community and ban too freely.
Last edited by pslewis; 11 January 2008 at 11:31 PM.
