Warnings and bannings, the process of Options

[sadolakced acid]

we probbaly need a bylaw about warnings and bannings, and the protocol for it.

we'd want to leave flexibility in the text tho.

[racoons > you]

^

indeed

also, i've said this before, mods, PLEASE BE CLEAR WHEN GIViNG VERBAL WARNINGS.

by this i mean state specificly who the warning applies to. if ther eis a sort of group spamming goin gon, but some people ar ea tth efringe and dont relally deserve the warning, say 'X Y and Z, you have been given a verbal warning for spamming' as opposed to 'This is your verbal warning for spamming'. dont leave room for ambiguity. firstly, its unfair to the members, and secondly, if provides you with a hole lot of crap if people complain that they weren't aware of the warnig, blah blah blah

Also, as there is the thread backstage for verbally warned members, if all staff post the date when they gave the verbal warning, as well as just the name, and then set a sort of expiration date for the warning (a week or whatever), then it will prevent the possibility of someone being lef ton the list for a verbal warning they got two moths ago, and then being officially warned without merit

[*mona lisa*]

Also, as there is the thread backstage for verbally warned members, if all staff post the date when they gave the verbal warning, as well as just the name, and then set a sort of expiration date for the warning (a week or whatever), then it will prevent the possibility of someone being lef ton the list for a verbal warning they got two moths ago, and then being officially warned without merit

We can't have an expiration date for a warning. Heck, members' names who were warned at the time the thread was made are still there. The so called expiration date varies. If the person continues to spam, member bash whatever, why should we take their warning off? Because even though they're not following rules, a certain amount of time has passed? I think not...

Oh, and in case you didn't see, click the 0% under your name. ;) I remember you were wondering how it went down.

[racoons > you]

We can't have an expiration date for a warning. Heck, members' names who were warned at the time the thread was made are still there. The so called expiration date varies. If the person continues to spam, member bash whatever, why should we take their warning off? Because even though they're not following rules, a certain amount of time has passed? I think not...

Oh, and in case you didn't see, click the 0% under your name. ;) I remember you were wondering how it went down.

if the person continues to spam or whatever when they are already on the verbal warning list, then a mod should take the next strep and warn them. if after a week this action hasnt been necessary, then the member shoul dbe atken of the VERBAL warn list.

i wasnt talking about removing actual official warnings after a week, if there was an issue of clarity

Why must there be laws about warning?

Mods are hired because they are thought to have good judgement on things like that. It's for our judgement based on each situation. If someone has a problem with the judgement of a particular mod, they can PM Jusun, an admin, or a head staff.

Problem solved.

sammi, the point of the bylaws is to establish a protocol so that there is no ambiguity. it is all well and good for mods to use their judgement, but individual mods WILL have different degrees of severity.

if we have a protocol, it goes towards making this less of an issue

PLEASE dont waste everyones time with saying 'the mods can do it', as it basically just negative, and undermining the whole process. if you feel that this isnt worth while, step down from the committee and let a stff member who wants to get on with things have your place

* <--- put in because my friend thought it was cute*