Yeah, I know, I have gone on record about not wanting to ban anyone, and I am still sticking to that decision as best I can. But something has to be done about people who will be a problem for the discussions to stay focused, or to do something effective about people who are just not able to follow the rules or be constructive members of this site. I do not mind disagreement, but when some people wind up getting into the middle of nearly every thread, for no other apparent reason than to just be disruptive, well I think something needs to be done about it.
What to do?? Well the warning point system is in place, but really, what good is it except as a reminder system if it has no teeth to it? Even locking someone out is little good, since it is rather simple to bypass a banning and get back on.
But maybe there are some people who would like to keep their identity here, and would rather not lose it even if they have overstepped the rules substantially.
Bear in mind that this is just in the thinking cap stage, but here's what is running through my mind. How about using the warning system as a penalty system? I think I can set it to where the minor things like lack of full name and such will get 0 points but still allow me to remind users of those sorts of things. But maybe having an escalating scale of penalty points that would incur FINES when they are warranted. In other words, someone incurring a 100 point penalty would have a fine of $100 applied and they would be banned until they paid that penalty. A more minor infraction of $10 would be incurred for less problematic situations, but still it would be an incentive to be a bit reflective about how to act on this site. There will be penalty points that do not incur a mandatory fine, but those will be cumulative until a level is reached where a fine is applied.
Should I have a mandatory waiting period before they could be allowed back on, regardless of the penalty point fine? Or just fine them, kind of like an on the spot speeding ticket, and then let them go on their way?
This will do a couple of things. One - it will not affect people coming to this site that treat it as the valuable resource I want it to be. Two - there will be substantial incentive for people who do want to stay here to be more helpful than not while they are here. Three - any paid fines would help with the maintenance and support of this site, so even a little good could come from those people who prove to be disruptive if they want to come back.
If someone gets a penalty fine, and doesn't want to pay it, well heck, that's just OK with me. That is certainly their choice to make. That basically takes the banning decision out of my hands and puts it squarely into theirs.
So anyway, this idea may be so full of holes that it isn't funny, but I figured I would throw it out for discussion. Somewhere there is obviously going to have to be a compromise point between banning people at will, and not banning people at all. Trying to reach a point where most people are happy about the compromise is going to be rather tricky.
Anyway, this is open for discussion. Shoot it down, suggest options, or say what you will about a possible better solution.
Even if it is a really dumb idea but you can't think of anything better, heck I can take it. Let me know.
Thanks.
What to do?? Well the warning point system is in place, but really, what good is it except as a reminder system if it has no teeth to it? Even locking someone out is little good, since it is rather simple to bypass a banning and get back on.
But maybe there are some people who would like to keep their identity here, and would rather not lose it even if they have overstepped the rules substantially.
Bear in mind that this is just in the thinking cap stage, but here's what is running through my mind. How about using the warning system as a penalty system? I think I can set it to where the minor things like lack of full name and such will get 0 points but still allow me to remind users of those sorts of things. But maybe having an escalating scale of penalty points that would incur FINES when they are warranted. In other words, someone incurring a 100 point penalty would have a fine of $100 applied and they would be banned until they paid that penalty. A more minor infraction of $10 would be incurred for less problematic situations, but still it would be an incentive to be a bit reflective about how to act on this site. There will be penalty points that do not incur a mandatory fine, but those will be cumulative until a level is reached where a fine is applied.
Should I have a mandatory waiting period before they could be allowed back on, regardless of the penalty point fine? Or just fine them, kind of like an on the spot speeding ticket, and then let them go on their way?
This will do a couple of things. One - it will not affect people coming to this site that treat it as the valuable resource I want it to be. Two - there will be substantial incentive for people who do want to stay here to be more helpful than not while they are here. Three - any paid fines would help with the maintenance and support of this site, so even a little good could come from those people who prove to be disruptive if they want to come back.
If someone gets a penalty fine, and doesn't want to pay it, well heck, that's just OK with me. That is certainly their choice to make. That basically takes the banning decision out of my hands and puts it squarely into theirs.
So anyway, this idea may be so full of holes that it isn't funny, but I figured I would throw it out for discussion. Somewhere there is obviously going to have to be a compromise point between banning people at will, and not banning people at all. Trying to reach a point where most people are happy about the compromise is going to be rather tricky.
Anyway, this is open for discussion. Shoot it down, suggest options, or say what you will about a possible better solution.
Even if it is a really dumb idea but you can't think of anything better, heck I can take it. Let me know.
Thanks.
