One of the member I know on DP got banned for an year just because of the 10 point infraction he received for sending an abusive reputation to some other member.. As far as I know moderation in reputation is not allowed here.. Here are few posts I came across by the moderators.. http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=1417932#post11968786 http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=1643608#post13314619 So Moderators would you kindly explain the reason behind banning that member for spreading an abusive reputation? Why a 10 point worth infraction (with expiry within one year) in an unmoderated area? If it is moderated can we all start reporting reputation by Pm from now on?
There should be a clear and consistent policy on this. If reputation is un-moderated then let it be. If someone has been banned because of abusive rep, that's certainly not right considering the forum rules.
Lol... you think we shouldn't be ALLOWED to moderate reputation? lol Reputation isn't actively moderated (i.e. you can't report it or anything), but we do occasionally skim through a bunch of them (which is how it's always been). Best thing to do would be to not post something you don't want admins to see, because we can.
You could have given 1 or 2 point infraction but do you really think 1 year ban is fair for only one abusive reputation?
If it was just one, and if it was the first time, then sure... but since it wasn't one, and also not the first time...
How fair do you think is it: 1) Tell/assert publicly that a particular offence is not moderated/not punishable 2) And then Hand out punishments privately to selected people 3) No warnings 4) Straight forward 10 point infraction expiring in one year, while the same offence done publicly gets 2 point/3month infraction 5) Refuse to moderate bad rep for the masses but do it privately for some people (Robjones) 6) After all that claim that "we treat all members equally", "No one gets special treatment". This is like police publicly telling gambling in a particular area is not an offence, refusing to handle complaints about it but when one of their buddies lose a fortune they give 10 year prison term to the others while the standard is 2 months. Why tell others that you won't moderate a particular area and then start banning people left and right w/o warning? The user in question is Helvetii
1. Not moderated, but admined. And no one ever said it's not punishable. Many people have been banned for reputation, not sure who told you otherwise. 2. Of course it's to select people, why would we give out "punishment" to someone that wasn't involved? 3. Correct. We also don't give warnings to spammers, or anything that any normal person would know shouldn't be done. 4. No idea what you are referring to publicly vs. privately. 5. See item #1 an previous post. Rep is not moderated, but admins have always skimmed them on occasion. It most certainly isn't the first time (nor would I suspect it being the last) that someone got in trouble for rep. Definitely has nothing to do with robjones. 6. Right... no one gets special treatment. Doesn't matter if a member has been a member for years, they are treated the same as a new user. If a new user spams, it's spam. If an old user spam, it's still spam.
That would explain why you're words suddenly sound so explosive , you're just posting what he instructs you to post . Also since this infarction was dealt by Shawn don't you think you're stepping a bit over the line by questioning his decision ? I mean he's the main admin and owner - it's his place his rules , no offense but posting on DP is a privilege not a right .
Of course Shawn is the owner/admin at DP and has all the rights to give out infractions to whoever he wants to. But this being a forum is a platform for discussion. Akii is as much in his right to ask for clarifications as are other members. This particular section is titled "Suggestions & Feedback" not for nothing. Apocalypse, I suggest a more subtle way of arse-licking
Receiving the occasional red rep is just part of taking part in a forum, and whining about receiving them is silly, especially in a P&R discussion. There is a reason there's no "report rep" button... it is used to state opinions, and staff shouldn't become arbiters of opinion. Given the content of this one... which included a threat to rape my grand-daughter in front of me, the content crossed from "opinion" to something people go to jail for. I'd aluded to it in a post, though without that detail. Kudos to staff, appropriate action. I'd like to thank YOU, Akki, for verifying the source. Not that I seriously consider it likely an internet troll will do more than post cowardly threats from a perceived position of safe anonymity, but it is appropriate for staff to remove someone using their rep system to deliver criminally prosecutable threat(s). In true troll fashion he even added spelling and grammar errors and attempted to make it look like it came from another source so someone else would be blamed. I may post it on my blog just to show what a pathetic posturing crass little loser Helvetti is. Thanks again for confirming who sent it. Smooth move Helvetti. You're even dumber than I thought. Hard to imagine, cause that bar was already set pretty freaking low.
The user in question has a history of harassing users... 9 different times he received separate infractions for harassing people, which doesn't even factor in harassment via reputation abuse. But since we are going there, let's pick a few gems he's left for people via rep... But yes... clearly we are singling him out and never gave him any sort of warnings in the past (remember... NINE infractions for harassing people in the past).
The drama! Now that we know it was Helvetii who sent Rob a neg rep which threatened to rape his grand daughter in front of him, I'm wondering if Akki313 is still interested in pursuing the mods to withdraw the ban. My money says Helvetii didn't tell him exactly what the content of the neg rep was. Akki?
Funny part is Helvetti is obviously whining about it to his buddies... an awful (OMG! ) 1 year forum ban. Have mercy. If reported to Indian authorities, an electronically transmitted threat is a Cyber Crime punishable by 3 years in prison + a fine of 5 lakh rupees. Hey Helvi... should we forward a copy to 'em for you? Oh well, hope it was fun. Enjoy your year sweetpea. We sure will.
Obamanation, I know you are a regular poster there.. Don't you know that "Religious, racists and other such kinda reps are common there? I'm not sure but he must have received same kind of reps from other members as well.. What about that? PS: I really don't care about his ban.. Its about the coward behavior of Shawn and treating members unequally.. LOL.. Do you know a murderer here get bail in Rs25,000?
There have been hundreds of people banned for rep abuse. Not sure where the inequality exists. Regardless, Helvetii being banned has nothing to do with the actions of other users. It's simply due to his own actions, that's all. {shrug} Let's just say for sake of argument this was a court (which it's not of course) and someone was on trial for killing someone. Do you see how silly of a defense it would be for them to claim they are not guilty because they aren't being treated equal? But I am curious... who exactly should he be treated equal to? As far as I know he's treated the same as anyone else. I guarantee that someone who received 9 warnings/infractions for harassing people and then continued to do it would be treated exactly the same. The logic of a child would argue inequality, cowardice and that we "aren't ALLOWED" to take action on abusive behavior simply because it was done via rep.
Wasn't endorsing your judiciary, just noting a 1 year ban beats 3 behind bars. Yet HELVETTI whines. Quite the stud. As for your opinion whether an owner can moderate his own forum, I'm sure it'll get all the consideration it deserves. Thanks again for publicly outing the vile little putz. He tried to hide behind the rep system... Didn't work out so well. Thanks to you, everyone knows what a coward he is.
I am against abuse in rep but all the mods ever said was that rep is unmoderated and just ignore if some abuses etc. Ok, you started taking it seriously but how come did one start recieving straight 10 point infractions without the rule in FAQS. Helvetii gave me a stupid red rep a year ago maybe in Hindi but i don't think he got a infraction then. Anyway i don't think we would even remember helvetii after 1 year. 1 year is a lot of time IMO.
There are all sorts of things that don't need to be specifically outlined in the rules because they are pretty universal. Someone would get banned if they went to another member's house and killed them. Do we really need to make a rule that it's not allowed to kill other members? If someone is unable to function as a normal human being and know that certain things probably shouldn't be done without outlining them, they probably shouldn't be here to begin with. Do we also need to state that DDoSing our site can get you banned? Or should we just assume they were doing it innocently because it's just what they normally do and we had no "rule" against it?