132 replies to this topic

[Brother Fox]

Fairly self explanatory title and question.

 

It's popped up recently and without any info its completely meaningles. Is zero good, bad or indifferent?

 

Theres almost no point having a warning system if no one knows what it means and how it affects them.

I guess in theory it might prompt someone to pull their head in if they're getting close to a ban .... but only if they know what it means.

 

 

[Gilles4Ever]

Warning Points:

 

ALL WARNINGS TAKE PLACE PRIVATELY AND ARE BETWEEN THE MODERATORS AND THE MEMBER ONLY

 

When a member transgresses there are a number of options or combinations available to us.

• Edit the post
• Remove the post
• Warning via PM privately (only between that moderator and the member)
• Official Warning that can carry a point weighting of 0 or 1
• Suspend member's ability to post for a certain amount of time
• Suspend member's ability to access the forum for a certain amount of time
• Ban the member from the relevant forum/s
• Ban the member

 

The severity of the offence, the posting frequency, how long the poster has been a member, previous transgressions, what you contribute and posting style all play a part in the action taken when a member transgresses. It is not a case of 3 strikes and you are out nor is it true that you won't get banned if you transgress and have no points. You can have a lot of points over many years and be "safe", yet you can have a couple of points in a few months and be on your final warning. You will usually be warned that it is your last warning if you are a repeat offender.

 

As many posters here can attest a high point count doesn't mean automatic exclusion.

[pacificquay]

So the point system is essentially pointless?

[milestone 11]

Thanks for the clarification G4E. Could you please explain what constitutes an "official warning", i.e. is it actually marked as such? Is there a written distinction between this, "Warning via PM privately (only between that moderator and the member)" and this, "Official Warning that can carry a point weighting of 0 or 1."

Thanks.

[Gilles4Ever]

The warning/points system has always been there, it's just been hidden until now. It's just a record of the actions taken by moderators on your account be it warnings or something like being given access to Paddock Club. You won't have a point without having received a warning. With the new system all the official warnings will appear as notifications and must be read, failing to do so results in a 24 hour suspension. This is also true for joining Paddock Club so please don't ignore these messages. Furthermore all warnings will also be e-mailed to the member so it is imperative that an active e-mail address be maintained.

 

From the Forum Rules

• You must have a valid and working e-mail in your profile at all times. If your e-mail is not working and a moderator attempts to contact you, you will be banned.

 

 

Depending on the transgression the moderator may decide that an "official" warning is not the way to go and just contact the member by PM and steer them in the correct direction. It does not mean that it can be ignored, if the member transgresses again this warning may be brought up if there is a discussion and would count against them.

[milestone 11]

 

Depending on the transgression the moderator may decide that an "official" warning is not the way to go and just contact the member by PM and steer them in the correct direction. It does not mean that it can be ignored, if the member transgresses again this warning may be brought up if there is a discussion and would count against them.

Thanks G4E but is there a written distinction, more importantly, was there a written distinction in the past? Were warnings which carried a penalty point previously marked as "Official Warning".

Edited by milestone 11, 30 August 2013 - 11:13.

[Gilles4Ever]

Thanks G4E but is there a written distinction, more importantly, was there a written distinction in the past? Were warnings which carried a penalty point previously marked as "Official Warning".

AFAIK there was no way for you to tell if it was official or not unless otherwise stated. If you have 1 warning when you look at your points but have received more than 1 PM/Warning then you can assume the others were "unofficial" but don't get hung up on it, it's not a big issue.

[KWSN - DSM]

This issue have ruffled a few feathers here after the warnings have become visible to the admins, and the posters who have them. I think Gilles4Ever explain exactly what they are here, as well that they have always been here.

[Gilles4Ever]

I see no reason why it should ruffle feathers, only you can see how many points you have and you can revisit the reasons and messages you received. You could always have revisited the warnings by checking the PMs you received.

The warning points have always been visible to mods and admins.

[KWSN - DSM]

I see no reason why it should ruffle feathers, only you can see how many points you have and you can revisit the reasons and messages you received. You could always have revisited the warnings by checking the PMs you received.
The warning points have always been visible to mods and admins.

As I wrote I am good I understand that, I understand the system now, but we regular posters did not realize the system existed, and when we could see them suddenly combined them with our most recent posts, and decided incorrectly that we were receiving warnings for what we raised our voices about dealing with the new forum. I know of at least one poster who specifically thought himself 'warned' for repeated disagreement in 1 single thread this week.

So feathers were ruffled as something appeared as if out of nowhere.

[milestone 11]

AFAIK there was no way for you to tell if it was official or not unless otherwise stated. If you have 1 warning when you look at your points but have received more than 1 PM/Warning then you can assume the others were "unofficial" but don't get hung up on it, it's not a big issue.

Thanks G4E. What I am getting by clicking on the warning is seen below. I have at no time been told that I was being "Officially Warned". The only thing that I'm getting hung up about is that it's taken 3 or 4 years to find out that I am receipt of a warning that was issued more than 3 years ago and this is the very first time that I've been made aware of it.

[Gilles4Ever]

Thanks G4E. What I am getting by clicking on the warning is seen below. I have at no time been told that I was being "Officially Warned". The only thing that I'm getting hung up about is that it's taken 3 or 4 years to find out that I am receipt of a warning that was issued more than 3 years ago and this is the very first time that I've been made aware of it.

You have a PM

[pacificquay]

When do the points expire?

[Buttoneer]

They don't, but clearly they lose their significance over time.

[BullHead]

What is considered a lot of points? 5? 10?

out of interest...

[Mandzipop]

I wouldn't worry too much about the number of the points, that is just a guide. How you got them is more important. As G4E put it-:

 

 

The severity of the offence, the posting frequency, how long the poster has been a member, previous transgressions, what you contribute and posting style all play a part in the action taken when a member transgresses. It is not a case of 3 strikes and you are out nor is it true that you won't get banned if you transgress and have no points. You can have a lot of points over many years and be "safe", yet you can have a couple of points in a few months and be on your final warning. You will usually be warned that it is your last warning if you are a repeat offender.

 

As many posters here can attest a high point count doesn't mean automatic exclusion.

 

There is no set number.

[D-Type]

What puzzles me is that nowhere is this system explained publicly in a readily accessible place like "Forum Rules". 

[Gilles4Ever]

Oversight, it will be added to the forum rules in due course. No conspiracy.

[kismet]

I feel like such a criminal now when I post and my rap sheet's constantly shown under my avatar.

 

Like someone else upthread, I, too, was blissfully unaware that what I perceived to be an innocent misunderstanding four years ago actually seems to have been an official warning. No biggie, I've read the replies in this thread and I appreciate that an occasional warning's not going to get me banned from the board but it would've been nice to be told at the time. What if it had been my, say, fifth official warning I knew nothing about?

[Gilles4Ever]

An improvement in the new system is that you won't be able to be warned without knowing about it, there will be a notification and an email for the member.

[BullHead]

lol. how many has jp got? he wants to start a championship

[Buttoneer]

JP isn't even on the podium.

[Seanspeed]

I feel like such a criminal now when I post and my rap sheet's constantly shown under my avatar.

My main issue with it.  Whether intended or not, I now feel like my posts are being seen extra-critically because of the amount of warning points I have, like I'm a felon on parole or something.  Any reassurance that the points don't mean that much don't really change that and make me wonder why the points are there at all.  At the very least, couldn't that be something that gets put into our profile to be viewed if we wish, instead of having it displayed at all times, right on the board? 

[P123]

Can we trade them for Tesco Clubcard points?

[Buttoneer]

Nectar points.  I'll let you know when you have earned a free ticket to Alton Towers.

[Brother Fox]

I appreciate the answers from the mod team, but I'm not sure I'm any the wiser ... But that could be more me

Anyhoo I'm on zero so I can take the high ground against some of you borderline criminals

[Buttoneer]

A point worth making is that occasionally the number of points you see under your avatar does not actually represent the number of messages you will have received.

 

Normally where we have written to someone to point out how and where they have broken a rule of the forum, this will register a 'warning point' for the purposes of cumulative total. Sometimes this will be processed along with a period of suspension preventing people from posting for a short period of time.

 

If for any reason this period of time is reduced, we will go through a similar procedure but remove a point from the total, without necessarily sending you a message through the system. Someone with zero points might therefore click and see a message.

 

One example I have is of a someone who was warned and had their ability to post restricted for 24 hours. At the end of this period, they found that they still could not post so we manually removed the restriction. He will show 0 warning points under his avatar but nevertheless have a record of the original note sent to him, but nothing for the point reduction, only exchanged PM's at the time.

[sharo]

Ha! An option of the forum which I had asked about long time ago has been turned on finally. The warning system has been here ever since I joined the forum but users could not see their status. (And be surprized like me )

Another feature of this warning system is that there is also an option for the warning to expire after a preset time. I can't see a reason why it is not turned on also and set to reasonably long period. Everyone makes mistakes, sometimes inadvertently, sometimes even just due cultural and language differences.

To err is human. to forgive divine. (I hope this quote is correct.)
 

[pacificquay]

By the sounds of it, the point system achieves nothing and should be removed.

 

If there's no "totting up" towards bans and if sometimes points are removed for technical reasons and if the points never expire it doesn't make much sense.

 

And for those who are paying customers of Autosport it is a bit "nasty" to see "Warning points" under their name whenever they log on!

[Buttoneer]

I don't see how you can come to the conclusion that the system is not useful when you do not use it.  We find it useful to see when a member was reminded of a particular rule and, if it needs to be done again, whether they ought to be aware of that.  If the last time they were told was back in 2010, chances are they just need a gentle reminder.  If they were reminded last week, something more permanent may be necessary.

 

The points system doesn't have a line over which you get an automatic ban or suspension as that would be too inflexible.  The rules state, for example, that some behaviour which might be tolerated from a long standing member will earn a new user an automatic ban.  In the past, it was also possible that someone might not have seen the PM which was issued with the increase in ponts, so it was followed up quickly by a second.  It would be quite wrong in those circumstances for the second one to push them over the line to an automatic suspension or ban.

 

Second point is that nobody pays to use these forums.

 

Each member is responsible for thie own behaviour on the forum and should moderate their own approach to others.  A member with warning points did something to earn them, and can see exactly what it was.  Think of them as battle scars.  Paying for a subscription on Autosport+ does not entitle you to any special rights here, because we have no idea which of you has one.  This is as it should be.

[pacificquay]

What I mean is that the points system should be kept behind closed doors in that case.

 

Fine for the moderators to see it, but there should be a way so we can switch off being able to see our own.

[Buttoneer]

I certainly see why people would think that, and perhaps there will be unintended consequences as a result of the change, but it's visible because of a boring technical issue with the new software rather than a policy change.

[sharo]

What I mean is that the points system should be kept behind closed doors in that case.

 

Fine for the moderators to see it, but there should be a way so we can switch off being able to see our own.

Why do you think it is good people to NOT be able to see their own warn status? Any particular user can see only his status (mods and admins see all). And if one values his membership would certainly think deeper when posting, knowing that there are some black marks on his account.

[pacificquay]

If there was somewhere to look for it, fine.

 

I just think that place is not under the avatar on every single post.

[Tuboscocca]

I don't see how you can come to the conclusion that the system is not useful when you do not use it.  We find it useful to see when a member was reminded of a particular rule and, if it needs to be done again, whether they ought to be aware of that.  If the last time they were told was back in 2010, chances are they just need a gentle reminder.  If they were reminded last week, something more permanent may be necessary.

 

The points system doesn't have a line over which you get an automatic ban or suspension as that would be too inflexible.  The rules state, for example, that some behaviour which might be tolerated from a long standing member will earn a new user an automatic ban.  In the past, it was also possible that someone might not have seen the PM which was issued with the increase in ponts, so it was followed up quickly by a second.  It would be quite wrong in those circumstances for the second one to push them over the line to an automatic suspension or ban.

 

Second point is that nobody pays to use these forums.

 

Each member is responsible for thie own behaviour on the forum and should moderate their own approach to others.  A member with warning points did something to earn them, and can see exactly what it was.  Think of them as battle scars.  Paying for a subscription on Autosport+ does not entitle you to any special rights here, because we have no idea which of you has one.  This is as it should be.

Dear Buttoneer,

 

with interest I read your notice...

 

''A member with warning points did something to earn them, and can see exactly what it was''...NO No no...I've never got a PM and what the text says ,a certain 'Pascal' has 'warned' me verbally--makes no sense to me..and doesn't explain any transgression (more than two years ago)..Reminds be a little bit on 50s school principles, where you have to leave the classroom, and EVERYone could see what you have done...I think most (and the average) of the nostalgiaboys (and at least one girl) are far beyond school and rather immun for educational experiments..If it's only the software that shows the 'mark of Cain' ok--please patch up the software..

 

Best regards Michael

[Allan Lupton]

.I think most (and the average) of the nostalgiaboys (and at least one girl) are far beyond school and rather immun for educational experiments..

All this gives us some idea of the difficulty of marshalling the other fora which we Nostalgiafolk never visit.

We've "met" a lot of folk from those parts in this and the other threads about the changes, including the helpful "Buttoneer" so it is educational.

[Buttoneer]

Dear Buttoneer,

 

with interest I read your notice...

 

''A member with warning points did something to earn them, and can see exactly what it was''...NO No no...I've never got a PM and what the text says ,a certain 'Pascal' has 'warned' me verbally--makes no sense to me..and doesn't explain any transgression (more than two years ago)..Reminds be a little bit on 50s school principles, where you have to leave the classroom, and EVERYone could see what you have done...I think most (and the average) of the nostalgiaboys (and at least one girl) are far beyond school and rather immun for educational experiments..If it's only the software that shows the 'mark of Cain' ok--please patch up the software..

 

Best regards Michael

Well I suppose there's little harm in discussing this one in public since you started it so I'm going to tell everyone what your transgression was...

 

You were admitted to the Paddock Club.

 

The system is used to document any changes to the posting rights of a member and that's your transgression.  You bad man.

[Brother Fox]

Funny, mine says "There are no warnings to display" when  click on it but I've got access to the paddock club too.

Maybe the recording happened after a certain time, I would have requested it not long after being here so would have been around 2001.

 

Probably a mammoth job for little benefit to correct whats already done, but seems a bit strange to label request/admission to the PC as a warning. In the future it probably should be worded better, especially since people are now aware of it.

 

 

Must make interesting reading of threads by mods though. I can imagine reading threads, seeing a stupid or inflamatory post, looking next to the avatar and thinking "yep, thats no surprise"

[Slartibartfast]

Warning Points:
 
ALL WARNINGS TAKE PLACE PRIVATELY AND ARE BETWEEN THE MODERATORS AND THE MEMBER ONLY
 
When a member transgresses there are a number of options or combinations available to us.

• Edit the post
• Remove the post
• Warning via PM privately (only between that moderator and the member)
• Official Warning that can carry a point weighting of 0 or 1
• Suspend member's ability to post for a certain amount of time
• Suspend member's ability to access the forum for a certain amount of time
• Ban the member from the relevant forum/s
• Ban the member

The severity of the offence, the posting frequency, how long the poster has been a member, previous transgressions, what you contribute and posting style all play a part in the action taken when a member transgresses. It is not a case of 3 strikes and you are out nor is it true that you won't get banned if you transgress and have no points. You can have a lot of points over many years and be "safe", yet you can have a couple of points in a few months and be on your final warning. You will usually be warned that it is your last warning if you are a repeat offender.
 
As many posters here can attest a high point count doesn't mean automatic exclusion.

 

So the objective of the game is to gather as many points as possible without getting banned? Do you automatically win if you get twenty-one with two posts?

 

On a related note, it seems that banned users are now searchable in the member list. I looked up a username I am pretty confident has been banned for some years, and it appeared, complete with join date a number of posts. However, of the nine thousand and something posts, only about four were shown. A quirk of the migration or is there some deeper significance that I have missed?

 

 

[Buttoneer]

Funny, mine says "There are no warnings to display" when  click on it but I've got access to the paddock club too.

Maybe the recording happened after a certain time, I would have requested it not long after being here so would have been around 2001.

 

Probably a mammoth job for little benefit to correct whats already done, but seems a bit strange to label request/admission to the PC as a warning. In the future it probably should be worded better, especially since people are now aware of it.

 

 

Must make interesting reading of threads by mods though. I can imagine reading threads, seeing a stupid or inflamatory post, looking next to the avatar and thinking "yep, thats no surprise"

In 2001 the old-old software will have behaved differently again.  Also, recent years have seen a huge increase in forum traffic and therefore an increase in moderator numbers, so we need to communicate better ourselves and this is/was part of that.

 

And yes, it can make for interesting forum browsing experience.

[Tuboscocca]

Well I suppose there's little harm in discussing this one in public since you started it so I'm going to tell everyone what your transgression was...

 

You were admitted to the Paddock Club.

 

The system is used to document any changes to the posting rights of a member and that's your transgression.  You bad man.

Dear Buttoneer

 

so being 'member of the Paddock Club' is comparable to the 'original Sin'??

 

I fully agree with Brother Fox ,who said:  ''..a bit strange to label request/admission to the PC as a warning...''

 

All understood--and no further comment from my side

 

Thanks Michael

[Buttoneer]

So the objective of the game is to gather as many points as possible without getting banned? Do you automatically win if you get twenty-one with two posts?

 

On a related note, it seems that banned users are now searchable in the member list. I looked up a username I am pretty confident has been banned for some years, and it appeared, complete with join date a number of posts. However, of the nine thousand and something posts, only about four were shown. A quirk of the migration or is there some deeper significance that I have missed?

If you click on the topics/posts options to the left of the screen on their profile, you are limited to only 4/5 of the most recent items.  You can search more widely using the 'find content button which is found towards the top right of the profile next to the 'send me a message' button.

[BRG]

I think it would be safe to say that this is one of the less desirable features of the new system, but not really in the control of the moderators.

 

BRG

(I warning point)

[Slartibartfast]

If you click on the topics/posts options to the left of the screen on their profile, you are limited to only 4/5 of the most recent items.  You can search more widely using the 'find content button which is found towards the top right of the profile next to the 'send me a message' button.

Thanks.

Two more questions:

How does one get beyond the 1,000 posts that seems to be the limit when one does that "find content"?

What happens if one tries to message a banned user - given that a ban no longer seems to mean the username disappearing from the members list?

[Buttoneer]

1000 posts is the limit at the moment and not sure how to go beyond that without searching for a specific phrase.  You could perhaps look at the oldest date represented on page 40 of the basic results and do a new advanced search (the cog next.to the search box) for anything older.  You will obviously be going back in 1000 post stages.

 

The banned user will not get the message because he cannot access the forum at all - when they log in, they are told they do not have permission.  The permissions for the banned members needs to be changed so that you get told this so I'll take it up with Hack.

[275 GTB-4]

1000 posts is the limit at the moment and not sure how to go beyond that without searching for a specific phrase.  You could perhaps look at the oldest date represented on page 40 of the basic results and do a new advanced search (the cog next.to the search box) for anything older.  You will obviously be going back in 1000 post stages.

 

The banned user will not get the message because he cannot access the forum at all - when they log in, they are told they do not have permission.  The permissions for the banned members needs to be changed so that you get told this so I'll take it up with Hack.

 

However, the banned user (using a search engine) can read most posts, other than those in Paddock Club

[Slartibartfast]

1000 posts is the limit at the moment and not sure how to go beyond that without searching for a specific phrase.  You could perhaps look at the oldest date represented on page 40 of the basic results and do a new advanced search (the cog next.to the search box) for anything older.  You will obviously be going back in 1000 post stages.
 
The banned user will not get the message because he cannot access the forum at all - when they log in, they are told they do not have permission.  The permissions for the banned members needs to be changed so that you get told this so I'll take it up with Hack.

Thanks again.

On the messaging question, I wasn't expecting the message to reach the recipient (unless their appearance in the list indicated a lifting of the ban, which I thought unlikely), but was wondering how the sender would know that they were wasting their time.

On the post searching, I think I may need a software St Bernard...

[Buttoneer]

The banned user can read most posts by just not logging in.

[Buttoneer]

On the messaging question, I wasn't expecting the message to reach the recipient (unless their appearance in the list indicated a lifting of the ban, which I thought unlikely), but was wondering how the sender would know that they were wasting their time.
 

No idea how that might be achieved but I do hope it's before, rather than after, one has composed ones magnus opus.  Or a love letter.  That would be terrible.

[275 GTB-4]

The banned user can read most posts by just not logging in.

 

Sure..my point was though, that if they were looking for users or users talking about them (as they might)...they could keep tabs on the discussion.