This is a question I have had on my mind for a while. I did not link to the specific post leading to me actually starting a thread because
a) this is a situation I have seen many times, not just this once
b) I didn’t want to call out the post specifically and lose sight of the overall question. I guess if y’all demand it I will link to it as an example leading to my question.
Here are the posts I see and wonder: why no warning?
The poster is a long-term user. I understand why a new poster is given a little slack in order to learn our rules. But if you have been here for years you should know the rules.
The rule is well-known and regularly enforced. Ignorance cannot be claimed on “I didn’t know I couldn’t be a jerk.” or “I didn’t know I couldn’t make personal attacks on other posters outside The Pit.” or “I didn’t know I couldn’t make political jabs in FQ.” or “I didn’t know I had to follow mod instructions.”
Why do those posts just get a Hey don’t do that note? Why not give warnings out for those posts that are (IMO) purposefully violating the rules? One warning in of itself is not a punishment per se but at least it would let the poster know that the mods are watching and intentionally breaking the rules will not be condoned. Maybe it is just confirmation bias but I think the number of these kinds of posts are increasing since posters know there is no consequence and at worse the perp says mea culpa but really they know they got away with it.
I suspect that the link will be necessary, because as a general rule, warnings earned are issued, which means that if you claim there’s a specific case where this isn’t true, you’ll have to show your work. Because the case may simply be that your opinion differs with the moderators’, but the moderators’ opinion is what matters.
Note that it is a long term user, a well known rule and the mods did give a note on it - it violated the rules. What is the justification for the poster getting a pass? And unless there is a mod rule in place like 3 mod notes = 1 warning then yes, you gave the poster a pass for (again IMO) a poster intentionally violating the rules.
The question remains: why not a warning? What’s to stop that poster (or any other) to do this again and again and again?
We are not required to give warnings out for every single infraction, and it would be more than a bit draconian if we did.
Political jabs in FQ almost always draw a mod note instead of a warning. Yes, it is something we want to discourage, but it’s not something that rises to the level of something like a personal attack. A “hey don’t do that note” as you called it is usually enough to stop the behavior.
Adding to that, in this particular case, if you ask from a practical matter what Congress could do, what he posted is actually a valid point. But that is more of a P&E or IMHO discussion since we don’t have any established factual base to work from.
FQ is generally not a contentious forum with high emotions, so mod notes usually suffice. I don’t see a need to clamp down so harshly on political jabs and off-topic posts, but we can discuss that if you’d like.
Then what happens if someone continually violates that rule because they can get away with it? Could I go into FQ threads and post “It’s Biden’s fault” and get away with it under your logic that it is a de minimus rule violation repeated ad nauseum?
How is no consequences discouraging it? Again, just a warning is not like putting them in SD jail but it would put them on official notice to stop doing it, especially as they know not to do it BEFORE they made the post. It’s like not issuing a ticket to someone illegally parked under a No Parking sign because they wanted to park there so the cops says OK but don’t do it again. Sure, that’ll stop them from doing it again.
If they continually violate the rule, they get a warning instead of a mod note. Worst case, they get a topic ban in FQ. We haven’t had to do either of those yet, bu that’s the typical procedure when mod notes alone don’t do the trick.
Most people respond to mod notes. You’re essentially saying mod notes are worthless, which in my experience is very much incorrect.
Since the website started using Discourse, it’s been relatively easy to forget which forum you are in. Especially if you browse the Latest posts or follow suggested topic links from the bottom of a thread, or respond to notifications. Furthermore, on some devices the forum name is hidden unless you are looking at the very top of the first post.
For something like political jabs in FQ, the thing being discouraged is hijacking a thread with politics.
The jab isn’t, in and of itself, a problem, it’s the effect the jab has on the continuing thread. Mod notes usually end any danger of hijack, thus the problem is avoided.
If a poster, or posters in general, start routinely inserting politics in FQ, then we have a larger problem, and mod notes may no longer be the answer. As long as it remains an infrequent re-direct from the mods, I don’t think there’s reason to ratchet up the response.
Keep in mind that, because of volume and time restraints, not all posts are read by a moderator at any given time. Do you report the posts and posters that you feel need to be disciplined?
I’m just saying I suspect some people game the system by intentionally knowing they are violating the rules knowing they will only get a mod note.
Almost 100% a note.
Not saying they ignore it, this thread is about why a person knowingly violates a well-known rule do they not get a warning to stop “gaming the system”. For example, if you post something in FQ about the process for a person seeking asylum and I come in and talk about blame Biden letting foreign invaders in I should get a warning from the mods since
I have been here for years and know the rules
The rule is well known. It is not some obscure rule like “all posts must contain at least one ‘e’”
Anything less is not a deterrent to intentionally breaking the rules.
The only way to objectively establish that is to show that they make a habit of it, and have a pattern of behavior showing that they do it routinely. And as @engineer_comp_geek already stated, when that is identified it can be escalated to a warning and potential topic ban (though it hasn’t been needed yet).
Unless you have someone basically confessing to it. Such as… They say something like, “I know this isn’t allowed in FQ but I have to say that Trump really screwed up by allowing this to happen.” And I would hope that showing a deliberate disregard would be taken into account if it’s reported.
Otherwise, what you suspect about a person’s motivations isn’t actionable by moderators, nor should it be.
Whatever method you have of reading other posters’ minds should probably be shared with the moderators so that they can take action when people deliberately flaunt the rules while making it look like a mistake.
You really think the rules and their implementation are so crystal clear and consistent that some posters are crafting their posts so carefully to obtain a note and not a warning? Strikes me as pretty unlikely.
What - if anything - is the practical difference between a note and a warning? Does some specific # or warnings = some duration of suspension or expulsion? For me, on the (IMO somewhat infrequent) occasions that I get either a note or a warning, I just figure, “Uh-oh. I pushed things a little too far. I don’t want to be that jerk, and I don’t want to hassle the mods, so I’d better make a point of dialing it back - at least for a month or so.”. I sure never thought, "Whew - just a note! I can continue to be a dick, at least until I get a warning!"
I should say, I wrote the above BEFORE I saw which poster was involved. Heck - get rid of THAT guy!
From my understanding, a note is unofficial and is more of a do-better message while a warning is official and entered into your permanent record. I think of it as when your boss makes a verbal comment on how you can improve in your job and it is helpful advice whereas a written notice tells you we are tracking you.
Yes with flexibility. Three warnings in three years won’t result in anything but 3 warnings in your first 48 hours is a ban.
Here would be my question then: You have been here for years and you have seen people noted for it many times so how is your excuse that it was an oopsie-doopsie I didn’t know.
If they get a warning for it then no damage done but maybe the poster will double-check next time.
I’m not saying every case of rule breaking is intentional but there are a few cases where I look at the poster, acknowledge they are a long term member, then read what they wrote and the forum we’re in and be like, “Dude! How did you think you could write that here.” And I report it and the mod agrees that the post violated the rule. It is obvious (to me) that the poster knowingly violated the rules to get their point across knowing at worst a mod will come in and say “You don’t do that. No warning issued.”
That’s not my understanding. My understanding is that a note is official and tracked in some way, because it’s the beginning of an escalation path if the behavior continues. It’s just that a note in isolation isn’t a big deal, that’s why when people freak out over a note, they are reminded that it isn’t (on its own) a black mark or something they should stress out over.
If notes are never tracked in any way, then it is impossible to establish a pattern of behavior to form a path of escalation. Going by your workplace analogy, a note would be like your supervisor letting you know you made a mistake, and try to do better. That’s something that at the very least the supervisor is going to keep track of and remember, and will likely note somewhere, even if it doesn’t get logged with HR or some ethics board. The warning is where you get the HR notification, and anything past a warning is some kind of discipline at work (such as a suspension, investigation, and so on). At least, that’s how I have understood it as a non-moderator.
Well there are a lot of answers. I don’t spend a lot of time in FQ (which is true, I don’t, at least not these days) so I might forget that things are different there. I may get a suggestion for a thread when I’m in a different forum so don’t realize I’m replying to an FQ post, or I forget after reading posts and doing some kind of personal research on a subject. The flow of discussion in the thread may naturally lead to the kind of post I’m making, if I were to disregard the specific rules in FQ that prevent me from making the comment I’m making, which would be fine elsewhere, and in the urge to get my point across I don’t realize that I’m violating rules there. And so on. There are many completely natural, valid, and human reasons for such a mistake.
The kind of “no excuse, you should know better” approach you’re advocating here is something I am very grateful that the moderators don’t follow, and this board would not be a place I’d spend time at if the culture was like that. I think a lot of others would leave as well.
I’m sure I am one of the worst culprits at not appreciating the different rules for the different forums. After a few missteps, I’m trying to be more aware. The rules do not reflect MY preferences, but I try to respect them.
I also haven’t been keen on reporting transgressions. In my mind, that smacks of “tattling” and “junior modding.” But again, I realize that mods and many posters value posters reporting what they disagree with/disapprove of. So I accept that that is the accepted practie.
As far as a poster’s intentions being “obvious” to you, I personally question my ability to accurately discern someone else’s motivations so precisely. You may well be more insightful than I. At least in some instances, I’d suspect a longtime poster’s transgressions to be more likely motivated by forgetting which forum they are in, forgetting that forum’s rules, getting caught up in the moment and not having a similar thread in a forum where they can fully express themselves - or any number of other reasons rather than the sneaky calculation that is obvious to you.
As much as I appreciate and respect our mods, I’m not sure they are quite so perfectly predictable and consistent so as to make such calculations pay off in the long run. And, if someone were consistently pushing things so as to get repeated notes, I’m confident the mods would escalate things if they thought it warranted.
I don’t understand why you’re so agitated over this. The way I see it, a warning is potentially a precursor to a suspension or a banning, if you get enough of them. It flags troublesome posters. In this case the poster in question is a valued member of the community who made a post that was, in fact, actually pertinent but unfortunately political, and our rules say to avoid politics in FQ. So a note saying “remember the rules here” seems to me entirely appropriate.
Again, I don’t understand why you care so much about a non-warning that you started an ATMB thread over it.
Notes aren’t really tracked; but we can go look at all of a user’s flagged posts. Most, though not all modnotes were flagged.
We can get a pretty good feel for posters who have a pattern of bad behavior and skirting the rules. There was an example today with a poster put on a 30 day suspension for their CT behavior. (split_p_j)
