Warning Level.

[d b]

(01-19-2015 09:53 PM)Massimo Gnerucci Wrote:  

(01-19-2015 09:29 PM)Thomas Klemm Wrote:  It's easy to notice as the spell checker puts a squiggly red line below it.

I see red squiggly lines under almost all words in my posts.

Massimo;
I see squiggly lines even under words that I spelled correctly. For some reason; my Linux is stuck on "British English". God Save the Queen. -den

[d b]

(01-19-2015 07:42 PM)Thomas Klemm Wrote:  

(01-19-2015 06:16 PM)walter b Wrote:  Bad spelling isn't assessed here. Definitly.

What about bad quoting?

(01-19-2015 10:02 AM)Gerald H Wrote:  I guess I'm still under 20% as I only fulfil 4 of your qualifying categories (plus bad spelling).

Cheers
Thomas

Thomas;
You saw that. Sort of ironic that Mr. Kill The Reply Button would screw up and put someone else's words in my mouth using his exemplary and compulsory Quote Key.
I'm not complaining though. Being credited with Gerald's thoughts lends me a certain humanity that I don't normally poses. He started using RPN 5 years before I did too.

[Thomas Radtke]

(01-19-2015 09:51 PM)Massimo Gnerucci Wrote:  Unless that you have to go to the first post (maybe several pages back) in order to insert a new reply...

Contributions to a thread should always have some relation to the original posting, else they're off topic and belong to a new thread. In this sense, I'll use the New Reply button more often to at least keep a formal relation .

Now let's see how this looks in threaded view mode .

[Massimo Gnerucci]

(01-20-2015 01:28 PM)Thomas Radtke Wrote:  

(01-19-2015 09:51 PM)Massimo Gnerucci Wrote:  Unless that you have to go to the first post (maybe several pages back) in order to insert a new reply...

Contributions to a thread should always have some relation to the original posting, else they're off topic and belong to a new thread. In this sense, I'll use the New Reply button more often to at least keep a formal relation :D.

Now let's see how this looks in threaded view mode :p.

Not possible anymore if they get rid of New Reply, as mentioned: then you'd have to go to the topmost post...

Ooops! I hit Quote, damn. :)

[Thomas Radtke]

Doesn't matter Massimo, we all have little accidents sometimes .

[Dave Hicks]

A few weeks ago I did some minor tuning to the warning system. Standard warnings are:

Cross-posting: 10% - expires in 2 Month(s)
Excessive Post Deletions: 10% - expires in 4 Month(s)
Inappropriate Link (Copyright/Offensive/Adult etc.) : 20% - expires in 4 Month(s)
Trolling / Provocation / Language: 20% - expires in 6 Month(s)
Trolling / Provocation / Language (Repeat offense): 30% - expires in 12 Month(s)
Reopening closed thread / subject: 20% - expires in 6 Month(s)

Some of these have never been given and some are only given after a freebie... or well... about 5 freebies in one recent case.

And I've tuned the penalty levels a bit. When the warning level reaches:
30% Suspend posting privileges for 1 Week
60% Suspend posting privileges for 2 Weeks
80% Suspend posting privileges for 1 Month
100% Banned Permanently

Moderators can adjust warnings and results as needed. For example a single cross post from a newbie isn't likely to receive a warning at all. The repeat offense for trolling is meant for cases there is an ongoing pattern of provoking people, looking for arguments etc. There are also custom warnings that can be given.

Generally the usual mechanism is: someone clicks on report post. One or more moderators get the report and investigate. Simple cases are usually handled by whichever moderator comes along first. Other cases may be discussed for a while. A warning may then be given, and a post might be removed, a thread might get closed, or if it's just a few naughty words in an otherwise good post, something like [naughty bits deleted] may be edited into place. (The system also inserts " This post was last modified…" with the moderator's name into the post header.)

So for example, if a moderator gave you a trolling warning your warning score goes to 20%. After 6 months that warning goes away and your warning score goes back to zero. If you do it again within 6 months you may get another warning and then you won't be able to post for a week.

Of course, this is all theory to most of us since only one person has received more than a single warning. Because we only have experience with one person rising to the point of receiving penalties, we may adjust this in the future as we gain more experience. Or perhaps we'll get lucky and there won't be other cases.

Not all "naughty posts" get reported and not all reported posts result in action. If you're wondering why no one has done anything and you haven't clicked the report button yourself, perhaps no one else has either. Don't worry about multiple reports - dealing with 10 reports of a single post is about the same as 1 report.

On the old forum, the system was: someone eventually gets fed up and does something. (Someone usually being me.) That happened about 3 times since the forum started in the 90s. None of those bans are still active. At this time no one is banned, though one person is taking a break.

[Don Shepherd]

Thanks for this information Dave. It sounds like a very comprehensive and fair system and I for one am grateful that you and Katie and Den are willing to monitor these things. It makes you wonder how anyone could possibly think this system is unfair.

[Gerald H]

What is "cross posting"?

[Bill (Smithville NJ)]

(03-09-2015 03:15 PM)Gerald H Wrote:  What is "cross posting"?

"Cross Posting" is when someone posts the same question/comments in more than one Forum category. For example, posting the same in both the "General Forum" and in the "HP Prime Forum". People that do this think they will get more responses, but it just serves to pollute the forums.

We don't seem to see much of that here, but it's quite common on some other forums I visit.

Another annoying tendency by some people (haven't seen it here) is to reply to their own original post with a one word post: "Bump". This serves to "Bump" their thread back to the top of the list. This is very common on one forum I visit, with people "Bumping" their threads several times a day.

One last annoyance is people who ask a question and then seem to get upset when they don't get an instant response. I've seen people who after only one hour will re-post with "I guess no one has an answer." I guess text messaging has made a lot of people think they are entitled to an instant response.

Ooops - I guess I got a little carried away with what annoys me.

Bill
Smithville, NJ

[TASP]

Is it 'bad form' (or worse) to cut and paste something from the archives into an active thread or to (re)start a topic ??

(I'm active on another board and you can get sanctioned there for 'necroposting' on threads that have not had a reply in 30+ days)

[Katie Wasserman]

(03-11-2015 03:31 AM)TASP Wrote:  Is it 'bad form' (or worse) to cut and paste something from the archives into an active thread or to (re)start a topic ??

Restarting or referencing a topic from the archives is fine. I think that the best practice is to link to whatever it is in the archives that's of interest That's done quite a lot on this site and it's much appreciated as no one can remember all that's been discussed before.

[rprosperi]

(03-11-2015 03:31 AM)TASP Wrote:  Is it 'bad form' (or worse) to cut and paste something from the archives into an active thread or to (re)start a topic ??

(I'm active on another board and you can get sanctioned there for 'necroposting' on threads that have not had a reply in 30+ days)

Why copy/paste the old? Just start a topic in your own words, and if you think it's important to reference the prior discussion, just add a link to that old thread so folks can go read as much of the prior discussion as is warranted, not limiting it to the section you may have chosen to paste in.

Great minds and all that Katie... posting at the same time.

[John Galt]

(03-09-2015 03:15 PM)Gerald H Wrote:  What is "cross posting"?

"Cross Posting" is composing a response while one is bit cross regarding a particular subject. For example,

(03-09-2015 03:30 PM)Bill (Smithville NJ) Wrote:  Ooops - I guess I got a little carried away with what annoys me.

There you go.

(Not to be confused with "Cross Dressing" which is to wear clothing in such a manner as to make others angry. This practice is illegal in certain US states.)

[Gerald H]

(03-11-2015 03:45 AM)John Galt Wrote:  

(03-09-2015 03:15 PM)Gerald H Wrote:  What is "cross posting"?

"Cross Posting" is composing a response while one is bit cross regarding a particular subject. For example,

(03-09-2015 03:30 PM)Bill (Smithville NJ) Wrote:  Ooops - I guess I got a little carried away with what annoys me.

There you go.

(Not to be confused with "Cross Dressing" which is to wear clothing in such a manner as to make others angry. This practice is illegal in certain US states.)

In London my mother first wore trousers at the age of 76 (around 2009) & seemed pleased with her cross dressing.

Nice to hear some of the USA maintain a healthy tradition.

[PANAMATIK]

(03-09-2015 04:32 AM)Dave Hicks Wrote:  And I've tuned the penalty levels a bit. When the warning level reaches:
30% Suspend posting privileges for 1 Week
60% Suspend posting privileges for 2 Weeks
80% Suspend posting privileges for 1 Month
100% Banned Permanently

If somebody is 30% can he answer PMs? Can he receive PMs? Can he send e-mails? How can I realize that somebody, from whom Im awaiting an answer is suspended?

Bernhard

[Dave Hicks]

At this time, I believe you can PM a suspended person. Even if that changes in the future, suspensions and bans are so rare here that it's more likely that any lack of response is due to vacation, being busy, etc.

I say "at this time" because the current forum is only around a year and a half old and we may make further adjustments and refinements as we become more experienced. Many things can be adjusted both at the framework level and on an individual basis.

[renif]

(03-11-2015 01:07 PM)Geir Isene Wrote:  I am a bit sceptical to comprehensive systems for handling interpersonal realtions. My experience is that relations between people are best handled by direct communication with the people involved and not by any set system.

Total agreement with your observation! Problems with human beings, especially in internet fora, are addressed the best way on a human basis, not in an automated system. That said, it is also necessary to impose a certain frame of rules to prevent future problems. In the end, the success of moderation depends on a reasonable balance between both targets. Something, an automatic system never will achieve.

IMHO the forum needs some sort of rebalancing, not on the side of automatic warning levels, but in the the way moderation work is done. Above all, a good moderator never discusses any conflict with a user directly in a thread. He or she should discuss the issue by sending an PM ("direct communication" as said above by Geir Isene), because it's not the aim to make someone look like a fool, nor to insult any user. Unfortunately, that's exactly what happened recently.

A good moderator knows how to mitigate a conflict even without an automatic warning system, that's why we call him moderator at all (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/moderare).

Greetings

[RayAtHP]

(03-15-2015 04:53 PM)renif Wrote:  

(03-11-2015 01:07 PM)Geir Isene Wrote:  I am a bit sceptical to comprehensive systems for handling interpersonal realtions. My experience is that relations between people are best handled by direct communication with the people involved and not by any set system.

Total agreement with your observation! Problems with human beings, especially in internet fora, are addressed the best way on a human basis, not in an automated system. That said, it is also necessary to impose a certain frame of rules to prevent future problems. In the end, the success of moderation depends on a reasonable balance between both targets. Something, an automatic system never will achieve.

IMHO the forum needs some sort of rebalancing, not on the side of automatic warning levels, but in the the way moderation work is done. Above all, a good moderator never discusses any conflict with a user directly in a thread. He or she should discuss the issue by sending an PM ("direct communication" as said above by Geir Isene), because it's not the aim to make someone look like a fool, nor to insult any user. Unfortunately, that's exactly what happened recently.

A good moderator knows how to mitigate a conflict even without an automatic warning system, that's why we call him moderator at all (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/moderare).

Greetings

+1

[walter b]

(03-15-2015 11:20 PM)RayAtHP Wrote:  

(03-15-2015 04:53 PM)renif Wrote:  IMHO the forum needs some sort of rebalancing, not on the side of automatic warning levels, but in the the way moderation work is done. Above all, a good moderator never discusses any conflict with a user directly in a thread. He or she should discuss the issue by sending an PM ("direct communication" as said above by Geir Isene), because it's not the aim to make someone look like a fool, nor to insult any user. Unfortunately, that's exactly what happened recently.

A good moderator knows how to mitigate a conflict even without an automatic warning system, that's why we call him moderator at all (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/moderare).

+1

AFAICS, this completely concurs with observations published elsewhere earlier. Though that lead to a one month vacation and three bonus points ...

As you wrote, this "forum needs some sort of rebalancing". It's out of balance since such kind posts remain accessible for primary school kids for months while simple but unwelcome nudges to think a bit were quickly censored and sanctioned or otherwise shut away.

Maybe, however, it's simply a matter of culture and education (as another member wrote recently). Alas, we lack a "court of cassation" here which suspends all verdicts the sentencing judge is effectively unable to convey to the convict within 48 hours.

d:-?

P.S.: And the required math: 1805 / 30 / 208 = 1 / x . Solve for x using a slide rule in a single move.

[PANAMATIK]

(04-27-2015 04:34 PM)walter b Wrote:  P.S.: And the required math: 1805 / 30 / 208 = 1 / x . Solve for x using a slide rule in a single move.

I used the Faber Castell NOVO DUPLEX 2/83N slide rule with a "single move" to the right to solve the equation 1805 / 30 / 208 = 1 / x :

As a slide rule is only accurate to 3 digits, 1805 can be replaced by 1800, 18/3 = 6.
Moving slider scale C 'x' to 2.08 relativ to scale D 'x' 6.0 reading 2,88
reading scale CI '10/x' at 1.00 = 3.46 (3,45706)



Sorry for the inaccuracy of 0,1%.

Bernhard