Something I was wondering about how the banning system works. I've heard of many different terms used, such as "the moon", "warnings", "infractions", "temporary bans", "permanent bans", etc. So could a mod please explain the system for me (and possibly others) to understand clearly. If necessary, the basic structure can be edited into the OP and this thread can be locked and/or stickied. Thanks in advance. EDIT: Rarit E has nicely put a basic version of the system:
This is what I believe they mean. I am most likely wrong on something. A warning is just a warning as far as I can tell. An infraction has points attached to it that if you get enough you will be banned The moon is a temp ban spot where the mods can talk to the user that's there Perma ban is permanent.
Mike actually suggested once that we should explain this thouroughly. Another one of the things we never got around to. I'd love to explain how it works but since i'm not a staff member anymore, it's not really my call.
You can still share your knowledge, oh wise Rarit E. I'd except any explanation. Echo has a similar model to what I was thinking of, but I'd just like some confirmation.
Well, the standard procedure is a 5 step plan. 1. Only remove or edit posts in very minor cases. 2. Give 1 warning per broken rule. 3. Give infraction if the user had a warning for it before, unless the case is severe enough for a direct infraction. Basically any infraction worth more than 5 points will not warrant a warning. 4. When a user gets 10 points or more, temporary ban. 5. When a user has been banned 4 times before, permanent ban. Moderators need to ask approval from admins for a permanent ban, but not for temporary ones. Permanent bans can be given without admin approval if you need to deal with an obvious spammer/troll. That's a very basic version of the Moderation Guidelines i mentioned in my previous thread. (the actual guidelines are a wall of text compared to this )
I know what you mean. The old days of EP sucked, EP is this day and age is clearly miles better Anyway, thanks for clearing that up Rarit E. Unless the other mods have anything else to add to that, I'll put that in the OP.
And before the site didn't have users that wanted to cause problems, so they never had to crack down.
Technically, I didn't need it explained now, I was just interested. I'm not sure why, but now I feel that the staff are a lot more approachable and requests seem to happen/get acknowledged more quickly.
1. Only remove or edit posts in very minor cases. 2. Give 1 warning per broken rule. 3. Give infraction if the user had a warning for it before, unless the case is severe enough for a direct infraction. Basically any infraction worth more than 5 points will not warrant a warning. Definitely not followed.
I can imagine where this thread is going. So unless the OP is inaccurate, this thread has served its purpose and it can be locked.
