[General Battuta]

Unfortunately I had no idea who the moderator or admin was who gave the original punishment out was, so I couldn't just talk to them in PM and from what I know the mods and admins try to not step on each other's toes.

Whatever, it's all cool now. Let's just stop this thread before it turns into its own issue.

[Mongoose]

Unfortunately I had no idea who the moderator or admin was who gave the original punishment out was, so I couldn't just talk to them in PM and from what I know the mods and admins try to not step on each other's toes.

That is true, but we also try to ask each other for advice and run more major stuff by each other before taking action.  If there's ever a question about who's responsible for some particular action, you can ask any of us and we'll use our Secret Mod Telepathy (i.e. SMF's mod logs) to see who was responsible and let you know.

This whole thread probably should've been handled by PM just like the original grievance, tho. A quick chat with Axem could've fixed it all up.

Now we get to metapost like it's 2009

Wait you mean you don't miss those days?  I was trying to go all #tbt but I'm perpetually late by a few days and I did it wrong.

[Phantom Hoover]

On a technical basis I think the whole warning points system should be disabled, though. Mods are human beings capable of thought: if they want to give someone a formal warning they can give them a formal warning, and if they want to restrict posting privileges they can restrict posting privileges. There's no need for forum software to second-guess them, especially in such an awkward and non-transparent way.

[Axem]

I'll just say I really hate SMF's moderating features, they're not really good for this kind of community and are very binary (which is why Monkeying is a thing).

But I think its good to be clear and specific with the warnings and to sign a name to them so someone can go to them if they need clarification. I will surely do that and encourage all the other staff to do it as well.

So let's close this for now since I think the points have been made.

[karajorma]

I'll take a look to see if we can improve the default messages that the board hands out (That should be fairly easy).

I'll also investigate whether board moderators can approve posts when someone is moderated. They should be able to do so, it shouldn't require the actions of a global moderator to do it.

[karajorma]

Okay, I've altered the settings so that a user can see their own warning level. And I've added a bunch of templates that can automatically be sent when a user is given a warning. That should address quite a few of the concerns raised on this thread. I'm also going to give a 5% warning to everyone who posted on this thread so that they can see if the new system is better. It will be logged as a system test and won't affect your posting abilities.

I've also reopened this thread so that people can use it to give feedback on those changes. Try to stick to that rather than just general complaining though.


EDIT : Bloody hell! You lot look like a bunch of troublemakers now. I look fine though. Turns out SMF errors out if you try to give yourself a warning.

[MatthTheGeek]

MatthTheGeek,

You have received a warning because you posted on Hades thread about the warning system and thus have volunteered yourself to try out the upgrade Karajorma is trying out. You posted this message:Re: Dev posting w/ moderated posts

Had you actually done something wrong you would have received this message

-------------------------------------------

MatthTheGeek,

You have received a warning/ban (choose as applicable) for insulting other users and/or staff members in regards to the message: / posting offensive material in regards to the message: Re: Dev posting w/ moderated posts


This sort of activity goes against the community guidelines which you can read here

As a result you are not permitted to post on these forums for a period lasting <Fill in punishment length here> days.

After that time period is over, all posts you make for the next 48 hours will be moderated. They will not appear on the forum until approved by a member of the moderation staff.

Please cease these activities and abide by the forum rules otherwise we will take further action.

Regards,
The Hard Light Productions Forums Team.

------------------------------------

Please give any feedback about these changes on the thread.

I would add something about who sent the warning and/or who we can contact for further information about the warning.

So that means there's no way to restrict post moderating to specific subforums? Because the point is to sanction the user in question, not to sanction the people working with the user - as opposed to what we're actually doing so far, which basically punishes the wrong people.

If we can't let people work - both the moderated and the people trying to work with the moderated - we have to consider other courses of action. HLP has no reason to exist besides letting modders work together.

Also I don't see me watched right now, did you forget to give me 5% or am I unable to see my own moderated status?

[karajorma]

I gave some people 5% (which won't add them to the watched list) and some people 10%.

As for restrictions, I'm still not certain whether a board moderator can allow posts from a person under post moderation or not. I definitely couldn't see any controls allowing that sort of thing.

[Axem]

Momma always told me I would get in trouble if I stuck around troublemakers too long.

[Goober5000]

I would add something about who sent the warning and/or who we can contact for further information about the warning.

This is a matter of the moderator/admin customizing the warning message.  In the past, we've emphasized the need to let the individual know where he messed up and who he can talk to for further clarification.  But it's easy for the staff member to forget, as they might be in a hurry, or think the offense is obvious.  Threads like this are a good reminder of how it should be done.

So that means there's no way to restrict post moderating to specific subforums? Because the point is to sanction the user in question, not to sanction the people working with the user - as opposed to what we're actually doing so far, which basically punishes the wrong people.

I don't think subforum-specific warning is possible.  But I'll look and see if there are any SMF forum mods to change this.

However, I disagree that this punishes the wrong people.  A modder is perfectly capable of doing whatever work he needs to do to support his mod, first because all of the modding tools (FRED, Blender, even Notepad) are offline, and second because the warning does not prevent him from reading posts or PMming people.

[jr2]

IRC is also unaffected, correct?

[General Battuta]

I gave some people 5% (which won't add them to the watched list) and some people 10%.

As for restrictions, I'm still not certain whether a board moderator can allow posts from a person under post moderation or not. I definitely couldn't see any controls allowing that sort of thing.

I like the pm, you are doing good work

However, I disagree that this punishes the wrong people.  A modder is perfectly capable of doing whatever work he needs to do to support his mod, first because all of the modding tools (FRED, Blender, even Notepad) are offline, and second because the warning does not prevent him from reading posts or PMming people.

Posting beta test results is not offline.

[Spoon]

New punishment/warning message is an improvement. As Matth already pointed out, could do with a who to contact for further information, but aside from that it looks fine to me.

However, I disagree that this punishes the wrong people.  A modder is perfectly capable of doing whatever work he needs to do to support his mod, first because all of the modding tools (FRED, Blender, even Notepad) are offline, and second because the warning does not prevent him from reading posts or PMming people.

This very thread showed that it was punishing the wrong people, namely the BP team.

So that means there's no way to restrict post moderating to specific subforums? Because the point is to sanction the user in question, not to sanction the people working with the user - as opposed to what we're actually doing so far, which basically punishes the wrong people.

If we can't let people work - both the moderated and the people trying to work with the moderated - we have to consider other courses of action. HLP has no reason to exist besides letting modders work together.

This cannot be overstated. Thus I quote for truth.

[karajorma]

Well the question is whether a forum moderator can enable those posts. If they can, then it's up to you to enable those posts. While I can understand a certain element of frustration at not being able to get your feedback instantly, there is also an element of "Well, it was you who picked him".

It's sort of like depending on someone with a lot of criminal convictions. You've got to expect that there is a chance they might get put in jail at an inconvenient time. If you pick someone trustworthy, you're not really running that risk.

If on the other hand, forum moderators can't do that, then yeah, I can see that it is a problem that needs to be addressed.


That said, we can easily solve this problem regardless of that if people are prepared to accept a minor double standard . If you have a project badge, you simply get monkeyed and sent a warning for an offence that otherwise would have gotten you moderated or banned. It's a little unfair, but it's unfair in the direction of those who complained about being unable to post on internal forums.

[General Battuta]

Forum moderators can enable posts, they're just not always awake (or in the same time zone).

Hades isn't gonna have a project badge, at least in the short run. He's a tester. Testers aren't selected for their civil behavior, they're selected for availability and quality of test output. If they're uncivil they should be rebuked in ways that target their incivility, not their test output.

[Lorric]

I'm happy to help.

I gave some people 5% (which won't add them to the watched list) and some people 10%.

As for restrictions, I'm still not certain whether a board moderator can allow posts from a person under post moderation or not. I definitely couldn't see any controls allowing that sort of thing.

Just to confirm, you gave me 10% and I can see that.

You could use the SockPuppet account to test this. Put it on moderated posts and try to post in Wings of Dawn with it and see if Spoon can allow the post.

About the message, if it automatically detects the level of punishment and informs the victim, then that can only be a good thing. I don't know if it's possible for it to automate detection of the person issuing the warning as well?

It's obviously possible for the person doing it to put in whatever text they want though, so they should be clear about what it's for and not be a dick themselves.

About the double standard I think it's okay. We're not in a position to be able to pick and choose talent.

It's good to see that we're getting to be part of bringing useful change, but this is like putting a sticking plaster over a paper cut while a deeper wound is gushing blood. I'm happy for us to get the sticking plaster applied, anything is better than nothing, but I hope there's room to do more.

[MatthTheGeek]

C'mon, this is 2015, not 1995. How are we still struggling with stuff like this? What happened to the future?

[Mongoose]

Where's my flying DeLorean and Mattel hoverboard dammit?!?!

Re: the options for moderated project members, I guess what I'm left wondering is just how much a team member being unable to post for a day or two impacts mod progress in an era when it seems like just about every active mod has its own IRC channel and SVN and probably one or two other official means of extraforum team communication.  And I'm not trying to cast doubts on anyone: if you say to me "yeah even with all of those other options this is a major issue," then I fully agree that we should implement alternate policies.

[Hades]

I can say that from my experience, a mod having an active IRC channel is actually pretty rare.

[Axem]

IRC is great for hashing things out or brainstorming (and making fun of Star Citizen, but I digresss), but its a terrible terrible avenue for making actual semi-permanent notes. I've only got 1 play tester for JAD and even after I get a live feedback session, I still need to go "hey what do I have to fix again?" and look back at the last few hours to pick up what. I couldn't imagine doing it for multiple people, I'd forget everything. Plus what if your fixers aren't on IRC at the time? Having a forum to record things like that is a good way to do it. A mantis could work too but I find that's only good for hard specific issues and less floaty "this mission needs some more zazz" feely ones.