Whoa! Time Out! This Isn't Right!

[BigDon]

What was John Hunter suspended for again?

He's being suspended for a joke thread on April Fool's Day?

Is this really where we're going to take the forum?

This is all I'm going to say for now, in case I've horribly misinterpreted the situation.

Please enlighten me as to the justification for this action.

[PetersCreek]

Yes, he was suspended for posting a joke thread...in the ATM forum. He's received quite a few warnings and infractions in recent months, mostly for ATM-related misbehavior, and he's been a member since 2005. He should know full well that we have forums for off-topic posts and for fun and games...and that the ATM forum is neither of them. So, he received a "First offense (should know better)" infraction worth 2 points. Adding those to the 4 points he still had on deck from his previous two infractions resulted in an automatic suspension.

[DaveC426913]

A guy in my office for his contract revoked for playing an April Fool's joke. In November.

He was squirting antiseptic hand lotion on the water bottles of unsuspecting people, who would then go to drink it. He did it five times before he was caught in a sting.

I thought it was needlessly harsh, but then, I wasn't one of those who drank from a personal water bottle that had been corrupted by a complete stranger...

[CJSF]

Clearly some of us have very different ideas on what a harsh punishment to fit a "crime" is. Thanks for explaining it, Brett.

And in what universe is squirting antiseptic lotion in drinking water considered harmless? I've always understood it to be potentially toxic if ingested.

(Don't answer that)

CJSF

[DaveC426913]

And in what universe is squirting antiseptic lotion in drinking water considered harmless? I've always understood it to be potentially toxic if ingested.

More like on water bottles.

But still. I realized that a complete stranger messing in your personal space (literally, your stomach) is not cool.

[Solfe]

I can totally understand dinging someone for messing around in the ATM forum. 99.9% of the time I land on the moderation team's side for pretty much everything. This post made me go look at the Infraction System. I think the tables need a revamp.

I don't really think that the chart was designed with the idea that a user would be here for a decade vs. a brand new user. If I may, I would suggest making the charts more progress by adding a 1 day and 1 month suspension but keeping the thresholds the same: eg - 1 day for 3 points, 3 days for 5 points, etc. More graduations. I would also make "should have known better" different from a "first offense", even if they carry the same weight, say a point. If someone messes with ATM or CT, they should be getting ding with "first offence" plus "should have known better", which is effective what we have now for a new user. Those areas have special rules which are sticky'ed. However, something over in Small Media could be a bit more fault tolerant and only get the first offense points.

At the low end of penalties, it seems the intent is to slow someone down before they get into serious trouble. A new user would feel 3 day suspension far more than an old user, as they are hopefully refreshing like mad to see their new community add topics and chit-chat; where as an old user might not log in for a week. The suggestion would make it take longer to get a ban, but I doubt that would actually play out that way. If someone is intent on getting to the ban threshold, they are going to do it fast.

[DaveC426913]

...where as an old user might not log in for a week.

Speak fer yerself. I've logged on three times today already.

But then, I'm a forum addict.

[PetersCreek]

I think the tables need a revamp.

I don't agree with you but if you want to pursue the idea(s), you should start a new thread for it. It would only derail this one.

[Solfe]

I don't agree with you but if you want to pursue the idea(s), you should start a new thread for it. It would only derail this one.

Ok, understood. I might... I don't have that much in it, so I also may just let the idea go.

[agingjb]

It isn't clear to me whether the infraction and suspension was for the April Fool or for mentioning ATM in a QandA thread. Either way, we are warned to be very careful what we post.

[pzkpfw]

It isn't clear to me whether the infraction and suspension was for the April Fool or for mentioning ATM in a QandA thread. Either way, we are warned to be very careful what we post.

"For" itself skips the point that there was accumulation. (As noted in post #2.) That does sometimes make a suspension seem to come from a low-level problem. As you say, we are warned to be careful; we also need to learn from an infraction (to avoid the next).

[agingjb]

So, there were two separate infractions.

[Swift]

So, there were two separate infractions.

Actually, it is more complicated than that.

Individual infractions are almost always for a single post, or at least a group of related posts (for example, if a person is posting the same thing in multiple posts and threads, or is ranting away with multiple posts in a row). The infraction given was for the April Fool's ATM post.

Suspensions are based on accumulated, total active points. You can get enough points from a single infraction to get suspended, but not always. In this case, John Hunter had 2 point infraction from January that was still active, a 2 point infraction from March 20 that was still active, and the 2 points from the most recent infraction. The total of six points generated the suspension.

He also has three earlier infractions, but those points have expired and so don't figure into the total points for the suspension.

[DaveC426913]

In this case, John Hunter had 2 point infraction from January that was still active, a 2 point infraction from March 20 that was still active

i.e. He was essentially on probation. In fora, as in life, it behooves one to be one their best behavior after being previously warned about behavior. Bad time to take a risk.

[slang]

If you want to make a joke... fine. Usually. If the discussion allows it, and a serious thread does not become just jokes. If you want to make an ATM joke thread for april fools... at least put some effort into it to actually make it a joke theory. Don't just post some false facts, that's been done thousands of times. (And yeah, if you've already been pushing all the wrong how-to-behave-on-ATM buttons... best not try for one more.)

[grapes]

Yes, he was suspended for posting a joke thread...in the ATM forum. He's received quite a few warnings and infractions in recent months, mostly for ATM-related misbehavior, and he's been a member since 2005. He should know full well that we have forums for off-topic posts and for fun and games...and that the ATM forum is neither of them. So, he received a "First offense (should know better)" infraction worth 2 points. Adding those to the 4 points he still had on deck from his previous two infractions resulted in an automatic suspension.

It's the difference between making a joke on the softball field, the office, and my mum's funeral. Even the last can be tolerated, everyone grieves in their own way, but if you do it again and again, she's going to get mad, she spent a lot of time and effort on the proceedings

[Solfe]

I don't agree with you but if you want to pursue the idea(s), you should start a new thread for it. It would only derail this one.

I didn't realize that a poster could do multiple posts, all infractable, but then only get one set of infraction points added to the pool. I thought was 10 infractable posts gets 10 different points assessments. That is pretty generous.

[PetersCreek]

I didn't realize that a poster could do multiple posts, all infractable, but then only get one set of infraction points added to the pool. I thought was 10 infractable posts gets 10 different points assessments. That is pretty generous.

It depends on the circumstances. If someone makes separate and unrelated posts that are infraction-worthy, then they may well receive two separate infractions. But if multiple posts comprise an episodic pattern of behavior—most often but not always confined to a single thread—then one infraction will likely be issued for the episode, rather than several for its constituent transgressions.

[grapes]

I didn't realize that a poster could do multiple posts, all infractable, but then only get one set of infraction points added to the pool. I thought was 10 infractable posts gets 10 different points assessments. That is pretty generous.

There really isn't such a thing as infractable posts, it's more infractable actions.

Some with a 'shoulda known better' modifier

[Grey]

This post made me go look at the Infraction System.

I don't recall actually reading that thread. I'm amused that the moderators have the option to give a 1,000,000 point infraction if they're totally fed up.

[Solfe]

I don't recall actually reading that thread. I'm amused that the moderators have the option to give a 1,000,000 point infraction if they're totally fed up.

Is that like a warning not to undo a ban?

When I was the admin of a chat app, we could never undo bans. We'd tag the dongle, the credit card, the IP and the physical address for lockout. Since the software required that information to work, we could lock out one user in a household without affecting the other users. Surprisingly, a lot of people would not share passwords and such. This was years before Netflix password sharing.

[Swift]

Is that like a warning not to undo a ban?

Not in the least. It is having a little fun with particularly frustrating people, for whom 12 points just doesn't seem enough.

[ToSeek]

I don't recall actually reading that thread. I'm amused that the moderators have the option to give a 1,000,000 point infraction if they're totally fed up.

I added that about a year ago following a discussion in the admin area. Glad to see someone finally noticed.

[PetersCreek]

I'm still a little disappointed that we don't have an option for "Nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."

[DaveC426913]

I'm still a little disappointed that we don't have an option for "Nuke if from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."

thescienceforum.com d̶o̶e̶s̶ did.