Warnings
- Thread starter ChatBox
- Start date
![[BL] Briggers810](https://gravatar.com/avatar/d3951700acff3355b8303e2a3fa6e425fef5fc1d23440e3112dd3c28f0316062?s=96){kind=avatar}
[BL] Briggers810
Addicted
The warning system on UKG is based on a 3strikes type of rule. 🙂
0 Warnings - No warnings, clean sheet
1st Warning - One warning and added to the staff watch list.
2nd Warning - 2 warnings and stared in the staff watch list.
3rd Warning - Serious warning, double star in the staff watch list and moved to the offender section in the list.
4th Warning - Banned and added to the banned section of the staff watch list.
This is how the warning system at The Chat Center is. :yes: Haven't had any problems with it.
1st Warning - One warning and added to the staff watch list.
2nd Warning - 2 warnings and stared in the staff watch list.
3rd Warning - Serious warning, double star in the staff watch list and moved to the offender section in the list.
4th Warning - Banned and added to the banned section of the staff watch list.
This is how the warning system at The Chat Center is. :yes: Haven't had any problems with it.
PurpleCrow
Up-and-Coming Sensation
3 Warnings and your banned, or if you do something really bad then your out straight away. Its all done manually.
I don't really think any stone set system will ever be effective. Think about it, should someone receive the same length ban for spamming as making a small remark against staff? Of course not, and this is why I feel it's best to free flow.
If someone steps outta line, it's up the the moderator to decide what happens. It'll be marked in their profile and be used if any further action needs to take place.
If someone steps outta line, it's up the the moderator to decide what happens. It'll be marked in their profile and be used if any further action needs to take place.
Watch Me Sink
Madly Diligent
I completely agree. Though it is flexible, most offenses go for just a warning, while continued spamming and pornography results in an indefinite ban.Leo Ghost said:
I run a laid back forum so you really have to do a lot to get a warning.
Staff will discuss concerns by PM the first couple times then warnings, then bannings or moderator queue.
Unless the member does something extreme, then that might get an instant ban or moderator queue.
Staff will discuss concerns by PM the first couple times then warnings, then bannings or moderator queue.
Unless the member does something extreme, then that might get an instant ban or moderator queue.
Fergal said:
Well right now it's manual. If you commit an offense you receive a PM saying you got your your 1st warning out of 4. Then your placed on the list. If you commit another offense you receive a PM saying you got your 2nd warning out of 4. Then you get a star next to your name in the list. Then so on so forth. 🙂
I've never taken the warn system that seriously. It actually amuses me when people get all fussed up when a warn note is added. When someone does something wrong, I give them a warning... it's just that a warning. It's there to tell them what they have done wrong and not to do it again. If someone has six warns for different things, then I'm not too concerned. If they had three warns for the same offence, then I would be. I'd probably ban them for three days or restrict there permissions.
I don't have any clear cut ''if you get 'x' amount of warns, you get banned'' system. People break the rules for lots of reasons. I prefer to deal with things on a case to case basis.
I don't have any clear cut ''if you get 'x' amount of warns, you get banned'' system. People break the rules for lots of reasons. I prefer to deal with things on a case to case basis.
Black Angel
Resident
Yep. Three strikes and you are out.
Depending on what you did, you just might get less than that.
Depending on what you did, you just might get less than that.
Black Angel said:
I hope warnings go out of the system after a few months... I'm on a 3% warn level on one forum. I'm still in "good standing" with the staff though. They don't let stuff I did last year come back to haunt me now...
Rich Edmonds
Seasoned Veteran
I base a warning or punishment on that situation and offense, I'm with Leo on this.
Black Angel
Resident
It depends on what they did. If someone pm advertised especially when the rules state not to, and you have to agree to them in order to sign up, then you should already know that by then, that pm advertising isn't allowed. Their punishment might expire, especially since it is minor compared to other offenses, but it doesn't change the fact that they will have 2 strikes remaining. The rules are fairly simple, either follow them, or don't bother joining.
If that person spammed the forum with offensive pictures and content, then that person is gone. Regardless of the number of strikes they have left.
I think that if a person cared that much about their warn level, that they wouldn't have broken the rules in the first place. Whether you like it or not, the rules are there for a reason (I am not just talking about my place, but rather, in general) if a person doesn't like the rules, or agree to them, then what would be the point in that person joining? By making the choice to join, they are agreeing to follow the rules, and so, if they get into trouble, they haven't the right to complain, since they agreed to the rules in the first place. If they joined without reading the rules then either way, it isn't my problem, it is theirs are they were the ones who made the choice to agree to something they didn't read.
I don't use my system like others, I use the warning to indicate how many offenses they had. I consider the rules to be the verbal warning. This is why I regard the first offense as the first strike. My members are very mature, and are very smart, and so, I shouldn't have to remind them of the rules, and considering the fact that they have to agree to them in order to sign up, and that there is a designated area for them, I really don't have to as doing so would be redundant.
I'd rather enjoy the company of my members rather than having to constantly remind them of something they already agreed to. Seeing as how I've mostly adults and mature teens on my forum, I really don't have a problem with them. It is the younger or immature members coming in from other sites that I sometimes end up having a problem with.
If that person spammed the forum with offensive pictures and content, then that person is gone. Regardless of the number of strikes they have left.
I think that if a person cared that much about their warn level, that they wouldn't have broken the rules in the first place. Whether you like it or not, the rules are there for a reason (I am not just talking about my place, but rather, in general) if a person doesn't like the rules, or agree to them, then what would be the point in that person joining? By making the choice to join, they are agreeing to follow the rules, and so, if they get into trouble, they haven't the right to complain, since they agreed to the rules in the first place. If they joined without reading the rules then either way, it isn't my problem, it is theirs are they were the ones who made the choice to agree to something they didn't read.
I don't use my system like others, I use the warning to indicate how many offenses they had. I consider the rules to be the verbal warning. This is why I regard the first offense as the first strike. My members are very mature, and are very smart, and so, I shouldn't have to remind them of the rules, and considering the fact that they have to agree to them in order to sign up, and that there is a designated area for them, I really don't have to as doing so would be redundant.
I'd rather enjoy the company of my members rather than having to constantly remind them of something they already agreed to. Seeing as how I've mostly adults and mature teens on my forum, I really don't have a problem with them. It is the younger or immature members coming in from other sites that I sometimes end up having a problem with.
Affiliates
