Status check and poll on recent crack down

[NiCoLe L RuSSeLL]

On most other sites...the warning system works very well.
You decide lets say, that after 3 warnings the person will be banned and fined. It's simple and no one can complain about anything after that because everyone should be happy. The innocents have a little mistake space---and the bad guys are weeded out anyway.
The way things are now---people who do nothing wrong (except perhaps make a mistake) and support this site will be run off. Black and white are colors that are hard to enforce....gray usually works much better.

 

[Chameleon Company]

Nicole,
Well put logic. What some others fail to realize is that there is room for discretion to be used in application of warning points, and that the system of stricter enforcement has now provided us with reasonable feedback. As an example, it was pointed out very early in this thread that you can refer to the "accused" as a thief and a liar (antagonistic, don't you think?), but if you use less antagonistic terms such as "clown, fool, or nimrod" when describing the accused, you can be suspended and fined $10. No one has yet addressed this disparity, and I believe that most here would say it represents one. I realize that an argument could be made that a "thief" is not necessarily a "fool", but both are matters of opinion in the BOI. I also recognize that Rich may have cause to evaluate the use of such antagonistic terms if they are used to describe the "accused" vs. just a spat between members expressing opinions, which have led to many thread hijackings in the past. There is no doubt in my mind that we have lost people from the site who viewed the assessment of their fine and suspension as antagonistic in that it was, in their views, excessive. So they bailed. You also can't please everybody, and I will be the first to say that there is no perfect solution. As for truly cleaning up the site, I would say that HELL should be on the chopping block and long ago axed. It is an income producer here, and while less despicable, still bears many characteristics of prostitution.

 

[WebSlave]

Actually, in my opinion, a $10 fine IS a slap on the wrist. Just assessing a warning point or three to most people meant nothing to them at all. The fine does get their attention, whereas in many cases, the teethless warning points were not. The "hammer" doesn't get dropped until they get enough slaps on the wrist to put them up to the 100 point mark. To date, only ONE person has had the hammer laid down on him.

Yes, some people have gotten offended that they got fined and left, and that was expected. Unfortunate, but I have a job to do and I can't allow a few people to make it harder to do that job.

And if you will look at the list of warnings (http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/forums/warn.php?), there actually is a dividing line between the marshmellow ruler and the stainless steel one that is used to rap across the knuckles. Although certainly not perfect, I tried to consider those warnings that are very minor, and those that the person engaging in such activities SHOULD know what is NOT in good taste on a publicly viewable message board like this. If someone with their first post here calls someone a highly profane derogatory slur, why should I bother to just slap them with the marshmellow when they SHOULD realize that such a thing is just not acceptable in a public setting?

Using one of my favorite analogies, I can't EVER recall being pulled over for a speeding violation and having the officer ask me if this is the first time I have ever been caught speeding. It is irrelevant to the situation and to the job he is tasked with doing. I SHOULD know the speed limits and I SHOULD know how fast I am going. The fact that I was speeding is prima facie justification for the ticket.

 

[Chameleon Company]

Rich, as you state in your analogy:

Using one of my favorite analogies, I can't EVER recall being pulled over for a speeding violation and having the officer ask me if this is the first time I have ever been caught speeding. It is irrelevant to the situation and to the job he is tasked with doing. I SHOULD know the speed limits and I SHOULD know how fast I am going. The fact that I was speeding is prima facie justification for the ticket.

Maybe so, but speeding is a very measurable infraction. So much so, that does not the penalty (points and fine) assessed scale upwards depending on how much one was in excess of the speed limit? In most cases, is there not a noticeable difference for being 5-10 over vs in being excess of 20 MPH over? It is far less subjective a situation than your assessment of fines. In that light, I like the analogy too, for I feel it demonstates a tiered set of penalties for the same type of offense, all based on degrees.

I know that you refer to $10 as a "slap on the wrist". I think to some, as has been indicated in several prior posts, its not so much the $10 (which warrants some significance, as mentioned below) as it is the preceived arbitrariness of the penalty. Its a gray area, as you have stated, but I again defer to the failure by many of us to comprehend the logic of being able to refer to someone as having stolen, or being a liar, vs just calling them a nimrod? I'm not saying any are OK, but in the assessment of fines system, evidently there's a big difference, and that is where I think the problem lies. In the end, part of the explanation seems to be "its my site, the rules are clear enough for me, so be it".
That brings me to one last concern, that may only be legitimate with the current generation of members who paid and contributed before the crackdown. I was paid as a member for something above the minimal level. I then contributed a far larger sum via an animal that I offered for auction, contributing 100% of the proceeds, to include shipping. All told, my contributions to the site were more than several hundred dollars last year. From my shoes, the assessment of a $10 fine if I wanted to be able to use the site anymore was holding my earlier investments and contributions hostage, for they were made when different standards existed. My argument is not that I or any others deserved special treatment, only that the enforcement system may have now shown reasons for tweaking.
I am not saying that there is a solution that will please everybody. But many of us also won't see the speeding analogy as supportive of the current status quo either.

 

[The BoidSmith]

In that scenario where you have repeat offenders they should be dealt with accordingly don't you think. Are you saying repeat offenders and first time offenders should be treated the same?
I think that what Nathaniel was saying is that he feels that people should be entitled to that first slap on the wrist as a warning before the hammer gets dropped on them. As i said above in my first reply, People dint need to be executed for a misdemeanor, Make the punishment fit the crime and the criminal in question. In most courts in our society first time offenders are given a slap on the wrist with a warning or community service or something of that nature, when a second time or habitual offender gets sentenced the Judge deals with him more severely because that person apparently hasn't learned from his mistakes and needs to be punished in a way that will dissuade him from doing the same thing again.

Nicholas,

Your example of first time offenders is a valid one. The problem was that some people were dealt with accordingly but they repeated their behavior over and over again. On the other hand we both know that regardless if you are a first time offender or not with certain crimes you have certain punishments. It’s no different here in MHO, there are rules and you need to abide by them. You steal, you go to jail, no slap on the wrist whatsoever. Besides if you make differences you will hear the endless complaint “but so and so got away with it, why did I get punished?” Imagine having to deal with that kind of complaints every day, would you be willing to do it?

Regards

 

[NiCoLe L RuSSeLL]

but ...see if you steal knowingly, lets say--at the market-- you go to jail.
If you stick something in your wagon and forget it's there and steal --they make allowances for that---they look at your record and see if you are a known thief or an innocent person who might have slipped.
See the gray areas?
I got stopped for speeding the other day but instead of a ticket I got a warning...I think he saw my daughter in the back seat---looked at the fact that the signs change every 3 feet on this strip and let it go....if I was in a corvette with other speeding problems on my license--he might not have been so nice about it.
It's all relative.

 

[Darknate]

I agree that some did completely ignore the simple warnings and I can understand completely why you thought the crackdown was necessary. The people I was referring to were not the constant "limit pushers" and those who wore their warnings as badges. I was referring to the few that, for one reason or another, had a lapse of judgement and were fined and suspended first offence despite a glowing track record. The flaw with the current system, in my view, is that those who called someone a "fool" are put into the same category as someone who threatened physical harm to another member. Perhaps the name calling rule should have different degrees. To use your analogy, those that were going 6 miles over the speed limit have a much lesser fine than those that were going much faster.

First and foremost it is your site, to run the way you want your site to be run. I think now though that the point has been made. Ease up a bit. When members have expressed fear in posting, I think that is a clear indicator that perhaps the crackdown has gone a bit too far.

Just a funny side note.....when I was pulled over for the first time, the cop asked me if I had been pulled over before. I told him honestly no. I admitted I was speeding, and yet he let me go with a warning because it was my first time.

 

[WebSlave]

So if it is my desire to have people err on the side of caution in their posting here, what is the downside of that? Lapses in judgement can be controlled with enough incentive. I am attempting to provide that incentive. Mistakes will be made, but the fine is not devastating. Maybe some people have fragile personalities and it is quite an affront to them, but in that case I suggest that they work harder at understanding the rules and not have those lapses of make those mistakes.

My goal is to clean up this site and do it promptly. If it takes a stun gun to do it, then that is what I will do. So far it appears to be working, as best I can tell. Been some collateral damage, to be sure, but the pruning will help for future growth. People were afraid to post in the past for being slammed by a few people who relished in doing that sort of thing. That is over with. If those people are afraid to post because of the rules, then the crack down is doing exactly what it is supposed to do. Watch your language. Watch the way you speak to and about people. You don't have to be nice and all sugar and spice, but you also do not have to be crude, antagonistic, or abusive either.

And the poll is STILL telling me that there is no need to make any adjustments at this point. If it were 20 to 1 saying I needed to relent a bit, then you would be telling me something. But as of yet, I see no reason to change direction.

And as mentioned earlier, there is a tiered system in place. 1 pointers for really minor infractions, 10 pointers for more severe ones (which means a fine and suspension), and permanent banning for anyone who has proven to be immune to persuasion to change for the better here. Sorry, but that will have to do for now.

And for the record, people HAVE been fined and suspended here for calling someone a "liar" and "thief". Yes, you may have seen some instances of that not being the case, but those are still considered name calling and being derogatory, so anyone doing so does run the risk of penalties for doing so. Yes someone may very well actually be a "liar", "thief", "fool", or "nimrod", but all those labels are just intended by the person stating them to elevate the flames within the thread. As such, depending on the context used, anyone using such terms are definitely at risk of getting suspended from this site. I am not going to be placed in the position of having to determine if someone is truthfully a "fool" or "nimrod" or "liar" or "thief". I have to assume the face value usage of such terms in a derogatory sense. Yes, you may get away with using them, but you may not. So it may very well be in your best interests to err on the side of caution if you choose to accuse someone with such a label.

 

[Darknate]

Point taken. Thank you.

 

[Chameleon Company]

Those points are understood Rich,

and I am glad to hear that use of the terms "liar and thief" sometimes rise to the level that it seems "nimrod" always will. As you mention, there has been some collateral damage, and I am one who thinks that there will be more. If its OK that it continue, and is unavoidable, then fine. If its not needed in order to continue with the crack-down, then what? Obviously, all matters of opinion. But just the term "Fined and Suspended" might be more accurately put as "Fined and Suspended until Fine Paid". Some of us do not see much of a "tier" between one warning point and a $10 fine, and would describe it as more of a leap. Did you ever consider or use just a suspension? Something like 2 days for something minor, and then on up? Or a system that allows an option to the member if a fine is to be levied, such as $5 or 5 days .... member decides? As I mentioned earlier, I was surprised to find that using the word "fool" or "clown" or "nimrod" cost $10, yet that if I had used the word thief or liar (which already had been used in the thread) I'd have likely gotten a pass, that the decision was yours to make under what seems a subjective system of judgements, and which was not the system in place and being practiced when I paid to be a member. Not saying that a crackdown wasn't warranted, or that those terms should have gotten a pass. But you made the decision that you could hold the membership fees and contributions of others hostage, and levy monetary penalties. What's a speeding ticket, $100 ? So you decided to grant yourself 10% of the statutory power of traffic enforcement? Sure, we don't have to pay the fine here, but again, we invested under a different policy, or certainly a different demonstration of how rules would be enforced. Am I exagerating? Sure, but not absurdly so, and I think that is where much of your collateral damage is rooted. If you did not try the suspension system, then I would suggest it as an option worth trying.
I am smart enough now, as are others, to know now what the "hot" words are, etc. My renewal is coming up soon enough, and I can make that choice when the time comes. But more than that investment in money is the one that many of us make in time here. While we often find ourselves in debates demanding far more time than we wanted to give it, it is still an investment in the site. I am not the only one here to take an unpopular position and run with it, and whatever the reason, it sure isn't to make friends. Decide what you will of motivation, but part of what makes all of us do it, and spend more than $10 to be here, and even donate, is because we believe in a purpose here. But when you say this:

...... If it were 20 to 1 saying I needed to relent a bit, then you would be telling me something. But as of yet, I see no reason to change direction.

I think that maybe there's something being missed. Roughly half the participants feel a little bit alienated now, and that some change is in order. That group is likely where more collateral damage will come from. I venture to say that the other half will not feel alienated if you do make some adjustments ... adjustments that would still maintain the continued integrity of the site, but reduce that collateral damage.

 

[Lucille]

People were afraid to post in the past for being slammed by a few people who relished in doing that sort of thing. That is over with.

I was beginning to tire of posting and getting slammed. Honestly, the post where someone was intentionally nasty over an ordinary conversation involving a time zone change was the last straw.

I think that it would be good for those concerned with collateral damage to perhaps step back and take a look at the big picture and recognize that there is some collateral benefit going on here as well that may not be apparent at first glance.

I for one am finally beginning to post more of my ordinary and I hope enjoyable posts in the Welcome Room and other forums, confident that I will not be slashed for ordinary conversation as I was for a while.
I think there may be more like me, those who love reptiles, appreciated the site and the BOI, yet simply did not enjoy some of the shark mentality and nastiness.
Those nasty posts will be here forever, and I am sure that when those who posted that sort of thing finally mature and become courteous and responsible, they will blush with shame to see some of the gratuitous hurt and garbage they so freely bestowed.

There are costs and benefits to every rule, every law. But considering the whole picture, and the fact that for a few bucks you can go to hell and be as nasty as possible on this very site, I think the changes are positive and the risks of inadvertent warning points relatively small.

Surely those who want to be part of the community will come together and recognize that no matter where you go in life there are rules of behavior and the benefits here way outweigh the slight cost of minding what one says.

 

[WebSlave]

Sorry Jim, but I know for a fact that as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow morning someone would complain about what I do, no matter what it is. So I will simply do what I think is best, with some input when I feel necessary, and regardless of what some minority group may think otherwise about it. If this direction alienates some people, so be it, because no matter what I would do, SOMEONE would most certainly feel alienated by it.

"Roughly half the participants" is hardly a mandate. Especially considering the minor percentage of all people participating on this site, it is hardly even an indication of much concern whatsoever about what I have asked about. Right now only 44 people have even voted on the poll. Two of them would rather go back to the wild west days here, so it does make me wonder about what it is they want from this site. How many daily visitors does this site have? How many total registered members? What percentage of them even give a darn either way?

The purpose of the poll was to gather data about something I was concerned about, which it is doing. If I had seen overwhelming evidence of my being on the wrong road, then I would consider that I needed to make a change. The simple fact of the matter is that I thought perhaps that was the case, which is why I even brought this up in the first place. Only 44 people even consider it worth discussing with me, and by no means is there any overwhelming wave of dissatisfaction over my actions.

I would have been shocked beyond belief to see a unanimous agreement for any of the options, so the poll is pretty much par for the course here. But just because a couple of people can be very vociferous about their position does not elevate it to a more influential status, overrinding my own feelings, or that of the other less vociferous participants. It just tells me you are passionate about your own personal belief, but it weighs in no more then someone who simply votes without comment. Your points have been read, I have considered them, I understand them, but I just do not agree with your assessment. It doesn't matter how many times you repeat what you are saying. Repetition is not strengthening it nor giving it any more support. It has the same effect as if I had simply read your previous post again.

A lot of people will make this kind of mistake in a discussion of this nature, where opinions, and not facts, are the basis of the sides being taken. They think because someone does not agree with them, that they simply must not understand their argument. Some are just unwilling to admit that their opinion is not universally accepted and think if they say the same thing again, but just a different way, maybe it will sink in.

 

[Chameleon Company]

Rich and Lucille

......A lot of people will make this kind of mistake in a discussion of this nature, where opinions, and not facts, are the basis of the sides being taken. They think because someone does not agree with them, that they simply must not understand their argument. Some are just unwilling to admit that their opinion is not universally accepted and think if they say the same thing again, but just a different way, maybe it will sink in.

Certainly we have both encountered what you refer to in the above quote. We have also both encountered situatons where opinions are first mischaracterized so as to then better appear to rebut them, avoiding or deflecting the original issues. Your poll is about 50-50. That it does not cross the necessary threshold for you is certainly your prerogative, but there is a balance of opinions represented, and does not reflect a consensus pro or con about tweaking. I know that I am not alone in the belief that there is more than one way to skin a cat, and that the current method, in our opinions, could be improved upon.

While only 40 odd folks have participated in the poll, I don't draw the conclusion that only those folks consider it worthy of discussion. I myself was a stranger to these backwaters of the site until another brought them to my attention, and I have no doubt that the majority of members do not check here often. Sure, a couple have voted for the Wild West, but that would be less than 5%. 95% were and are for continued enforcement of the rules in a fashion far stricter from the older Wild West days, and that is very encouraging.

Lucille, all of your points are good, but I do not believe that a single dissenter who posted here has lobbied for rules without a bite, for we all recognize they aren't rules at that point. I believe that we have all spoken for what we believe would be continued improvement. Not a person has made a post that wanted to see the conduct of the site digress. About 50% of the folks feel that the current system can be improved upon, and its not to return to the old way of doing things. And while not all can ever be pleased, I do not think it an outlandish assumption that some tweaking of the system would maintain current standards and garner an even higher approval rating in a future poll. And yes, less collateral damage.

Possible that there may be more than one hard head here, eh?

 

[Cheryl Marchek AKA JM]

I for one am finally beginning to post more of my ordinary and I hope enjoyable posts in the Welcome Room and other forums, confident that I will not be slashed for ordinary conversation as I was for a while.

I for one am afraid to post without checking, reading, double checking and reading again to insure there is nothing in my post that may be perceived to be "derogatory" "antagonistic" "profane" "a name" "sticks and stones"..........I was Banned for an obviously derogatory name (my bad~ I'm just such a troube maker!) ~ but it sure looks like a lot of the rules are arbitrarily administered depending on the mood of the day.

I know. Thats just the way it is. It was designed to ensure the Trouble makers like me walk on egg shells here. Live with it or leave......or leave......or leave.......I've been told, thanks.......plenty of times.

Think I'll go ahead and vote on this poll now.
Thanks

 

[KathyLove]

I see PARTS of just about every post in this thread that I can agree with.

I do appreciate being able to read various threads without having to scroll through pages and pages of flame wars as in the "old days". That was getting really old! I think Rich has done a lot to get rid of those who delight in that sort of thing. I think it is fine to let them live in Hell - I haven't been there since the subscription started, and so don't really know or care what goes on there now.

But I also have to agree that toning it down now, possibly using a couple of the suggestions made (3 "slaps on the wrist", then the fine, or maybe a couple day suspension the first few times, etc) would accomplish the same goals as the methods now in place, and without alienating those who rarely offend. As mentioned, those who need more than a slap on the wrist will get more soon enough, as they continue their evil ways! But those who had a momentary lapse will make sure they don't transgress again anytime soon!

I consider myself to be a level headed and thoughtful person who would not normally post anything that would reflect badly on myself - I am not sure why ANYONE wants to do that! But I do feel that if I somehow managed to mess up and inadvertently get a fine, I would be both embarrassed and a bit insulted, if it was the first time in all of these years I made a very minor mistake, and yet was treated the same as an habitual offender. It would make me wonder about all of the "good time" put in versus the one mistake, pretty much as what Cheryl discussed in her thread.

Yes, I know you say some of us are too "thin skinned" and that may be true - I would be among those. Although it is not a completely gender based thing, I have noticed over the years that many men seem to be thicker skinned about these things than many women. No, not all men, and not all women, of course!! Just a general observation.

Anyway, these are just some random thoughts and opinions on the subject. I am basically happy - as long as I don't run afoul of the rules, lol! I don't plan to run afoul, but if I do, I will probably feel about the same as Cheryl did.

I have to say it is nice to have these debates on a mature level without name calling. It is just that I think it is possible to keep that benefit without making (relatively) "innocent" people feel embarrassed or unwelcome.

 

[WebSlave]

Believe me, I do see what you are saying, but please bear with me on this. I felt, and still do, that tough measures are necessary. Pulling back this early would likely give the wrong signal and maybe undo everything accomplished up to this point. The last thing I want to see is some of the trouble makers kick up again, thinking, "Gee, I'm glad that phase is over with! Now I can be myself again and bash a few people here..."

Yes, eventually things will back off a bit, but not because I am doing it intentionally, but because my time will be sucked up during the breeding season with my own animals, and I just won't have as much time to put into this. And with this simple fact in mind, I guess I need to remind everyone that most of the actions taken enforcing the rules lately have been because other members REPORTED those posts as being possible violations. Which means that other people felt the posts WARRANTED the penalties they could possibly incur. So it's not that myself and the moderators are ogres patrolling looking for people to fine and suspend. Many people here WANT us to do what I am saying must be done, and is their input telling us to stay the course.

And even when things are rolled back a bit, there are still going to be many infractions that there is no light rap on the knuckles type of warning for. Someone new to this site who jumps right in with profanity, or some of the other less welcome mannerisms will still be subject to the fine and suspension on the very first penalty. Quite frankly, if that is my first brush with a person like that, I want it to be loud and clear that this sort of activity is simply NOT tolerated, and will not, even if it means they leave via the door they newly entered this site by. I don't want there to be any doubt in their minds at all that it will not be tolerated at all. Strict? Why yes it is. Life in general can be strict sometimes, and we just have to deal with it as best we can.

And honestly, I am glad people are taking their time to review their posts closely before submitting them. I think that is the ultimate goal of what I am trying to do. Make this a better site by REQUIRING that the people participating here post in a better manner. I want this site to be a BIG cut above the rest. I want this site to be respected because of the people who frequent it and how they present themselves in a professional and credible manner. And actually, I don't just WANT it, I now expect it. Yes, this will be hard for some people to do, but I honestly think it is a skill well worth honing and becoming accustomed to using often, not just here on this site. To most people you ARE how you present yourself here in public. That is all they may know about you. So why not present yourself at your best, even if it is basically at gunpoint?

 

[WebSlave]

...... and which was not the system in place and being practiced when I paid to be a member. Not saying that a crackdown wasn't warranted, or that those terms should have gotten a pass. But you made the decision that you could hold the membership fees and contributions of others hostage, and levy monetary penalties.

Quite simply, Jim, the fines and suspensions were in effect well before the paid membership program was implemented. And when it was implemented, I was very explicit about the fact that paid memberships will NOT entitle anyone to special concessions concerning the rules in relation to their financial contributions to this site (http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/forums/showthread.php?t=64541):

Something that does need to be brought to everyone's attention about these paid membership programs. These are not "get out of jail for free" cards. Paying members are still subject to the rules of this site and are subject to suspensions when warranted. Just because you PAY for a yearly membership does not mean that you are immune to suspensions until the fine is paid. I do doubt this will become an issue, but I feel that it is best to make this clear up front.

How else would you have me handle this? Anyone being a paid member gets a different set of rules applied? The higher the membership fee, the more immunity from the rules? Preferential treatment to those people paying the most in financial support of this site? No, seriously, I am curious to know what you mean by your statement.

And you also infer that once someone becomes a contributing member, then there is some sort of grandfathering in of whatever the rules were at the time of the payment. Just how would you implement something like that and how would it be enforced? The mods would not only have to consider all violations as to whether or not they warrant warning points, but would also have to consult a chart of levels of enforcement depending on whether or not the violator was a paid member BEFORE or AFTER the implementation? Interesting..... Unrealistic, but interesting...... So maybe I should have held a special sale on memberships prior to the crackdown so those people would be immune and could go on along as before while the newer members or non paying members ONLY would be subject to my efforts to try to make this site better?

Seriously, Jim, you are implying that you became a contributor here BECAUSE the stated rules were so lax and people COULD act in the manner that is NOW being greatly restricted? Now those same rules that were in effect then have stiffer penalties attached to them, and you feel that is being unfair to your expected use of this site? Well honestly, there very well may be some people who think like that, and will certainly not renew their memberships because I have taken away some of the entertainment value they relished from this site. Yes, that was a conscious decision I made, and I do not think I will regret making that decision. And I think as well that more people will appreciate this decision I made, then those who will regret it and leave because of it.

 

[Lucille]

I
I consider myself to be a level headed and thoughtful person who would not normally post anything that would reflect badly on myself - I am not sure why ANYONE wants to do that! But I do feel that if I somehow managed to mess up and inadvertently get a fine, I would be both embarrassed and a bit insulted, if it was the first time in all of these years I made a very minor mistake, and yet was treated the same as an habitual offender.

Kathy,

I am not arguing with your perceptions, they are yours to have and I understand what you are saying. But I was thinking to myself, that no matter how rare the error, the victim who is on the receiving end of a particular comment feels the same amount of hurt at that particular time.

When I got my warning point, I learned from it and went on. I honestly do not feel that the few procedural rules and the overall substantive directive of courtesy is that much of a burden.

 

[TomO]

Someone new to this site who jumps right in with profanity, or some of the other less welcome mannerisms will still be subject to the fine and suspension on the very first penalty. Quite frankly, if that is my first brush with a person like that, I want it to be loud and clear that this sort of activity is simply NOT tolerated, and will not, even if it means they leave via the door they newly entered this site by. I don't want there to be any doubt in their minds at all that it will not be tolerated at all. Strict? Why yes it is. Life in general can be strict sometimes, and we just have to deal with it as best we can.

Rich. I think any reasonable person would agree with your intent and practice as described above, applicable to anyone, regardless of how long they have been a member.
There seems to be a missing element though. Your focus and comments seem directed at strict enforcement to weed out those who fit the description quoted above. Some of the membership here (at least those who care enough to participate in these topics) has an obvious concern with minor, unintentional infractions, which by your reaction(the moderating team, the system, etc.), lump them in with those you describe above.
I know this is your site, and that it would be impossible to set in place a system which would please everyone, but IMO, this should give you pause. You can't reasonably expect well-intentioned members to feel ok with being bundled in with the garbage just because that's the way it is.
Likewise, you can't shoot down every argument for a better system by saying people are asking for special treatment. Undoubtedly, some do consider themselves worthy of special treatment, but I would wager, it is in reality, a small number.

 

[KathyLove]

I have to agree with TomO (quoted below):
"There seems to be a missing element though. Your focus and comments seem directed at strict enforcement to weed out those who fit the description quoted above. Some of the membership here (at least those who care enough to participate in these topics) has an obvious concern with minor, unintentional infractions, which by your reaction(the moderating team, the system, etc.), lump them in with those you describe above.
I know this is your site, and that it would be impossible to set in place a system which would please everyone, but IMO, this should give you pause. You can't reasonably expect well-intentioned members to feel OK with being bundled in with the garbage just because that's the way it is.
Likewise, you can't shoot down every argument for a better system by saying people are asking for special treatment. Undoubtedly, some do consider themselves worthy of special treatment, but I would wager, it is in reality, a small number."


But it is your site and I do understand what you are saying, Webslave. And it has worked so far in cleaning it up. Only time will tell whether it is the exact direction you want to continue with, and whether possible "hurt feelings" will be more detrimental to the site than too much tolerance to errors . I just wanted my viewpoint heard and will let it rest at that, unless new info or viewpoints are posted that warrant more comment.

I sincerely hope you are successful here with whatever direction it goes, since this is the only resource like this available, as far as I know.