Accusing People

[juventino]

Concise description:

• When people have made the accusation it tends to get "flame-like" in the thread. It is spamed with alot of nonsens and dobious things. The original post can sometimes be lost.
  
• Many accusations are not so well thought out and doesnt have many legs to stand on.
  
• Further on, I believe it to be, not a crime but still, not good when the accused is "convicted" without being heard.

Specifics:

• I propose that after the thread is made it is locked. This will stop the off-the-topis remarks and force the person who wrote the thread to really think about the accusation. His or hers accusation will be only in the first entry and thus he or she needs to state his (or hers) case more properly.
  
• After the thread is locked, the accused get an automatic pm that the thread is open and he, or she, gets 24 hours to plead his or hers case. (The time one can be away from this site without missing a turn)

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• I think we can live without alot of the offtopic and close-to flaming in these threads.
• I think this will make the job easier for the mods since they will have more facts when they make their decision.
• Some threads can easily be disregarded from an early point.
• The accused gets a way to voice his, or hers, thoughts about the case.

[4myGod]

perhaps just a pm system to whoever the mod-on-duty is, or some sort of report ticket that is completely silent and the mod can look into it. I agree.

[jefjef]

I agree with you juventino. Some complaints are flame like and with out legs or thought. (I used "some" instead of "YOUR" so my post couldn't be considered a flame) C C does lock threads when they get out of hand... but do you realize the community posts in re of a subject does actually "add" to the validity or dismissal of grey area complaints. (like ratings complaints)..... 1 star to ya.

[juventino]

I agree with you juventino. Some complaints are flame like and with out legs or thought. (I used "some" instead of "YOUR" so my post couldn't be considered a flame) C C does lock threads when they get out of hand... but do you realize the community posts in re of a subject does actually "add" to the validity or dismissal of grey area complaints. (like ratings complaints)..... 1 star to ya.

They do sometimes. But not so often.

And there are alot of bogus threads. If people are forced to put more effort in the first accusing post they need to be more clear, do some legwork by them self and thus save the mods some work.

EDIT OFF TOPIC:
And I do appreciate the semi-adult behaviour you showed there. I bet it was hard not to try and be on-topic and to have a nice and construtive talk. I think... hmm... 2 star to ya. 1 for trying to be original and one star for putting atleast somethin within topic.
END EDIT OFF TOPIC

[AAFitz]

There is a lot of merit to this, for many reasons. However, the process is like this, so other voices may be heard. Admittedly not all are relevant, but if others noticed similar behavior it is presented, and if others can show its false, it is also helpful.

Its community policing. Typically its obvious if the accusation is pointless, and the accuser looks bad. Mostly the accusation is for a multi, which typically is not meant to be personal, and an apology should usually follow, and for other cases that get more complex, well, while the opinions may not sway the multihunter, they certainly let the community chime in on how they view it, which is kind of the point for most of them.

I think perhaps a stricter policy towards flaming and spamming might be better, but that just causes more work, so really, all you have to do is ignore the useless posts, and the process works fine. Locking the thread would probably do the accused more harm than good alot of times, especially if they are completely innocent.

[colton24]

Concise description:

• When people have made the accusation it tends to get "flame-like" in the thread. It is spamed with alot of nonsens and dobious things. The original post can sometimes be lost.
  
• Many accusations are not so well thought out and doesnt have many legs to stand on.
  
• Further on, I believe it to be, not a crime but still, not good when the accused is "convicted" without being heard.

Specifics:

• I propose that after the thread is made it is locked. This will stop the off-the-topis remarks and force the person who wrote the thread to really think about the accusation. His or hers accusation will be only in the first entry and thus he or she needs to state his (or hers) case more properly.
  
• After the thread is locked, the accused get an automatic pm that the thread is open and he, or she, gets 24 hours to plead his or hers case. (The time one can be away from this site without missing a turn)

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• I think we can live without alot of the offtopic and close-to flaming in these threads.
• I think this will make the job easier for the mods since they will have more facts when they make their decision.
• Some threads can easily be disregarded from an early point.
• The accused gets a way to voice his, or hers, thoughts about the case.

i agree to my problem is getting people in there saying grow up kid and this crap

[Strife]

Well, you should know that you can PM mods(Preferably Multi Hunters) or send an e-ticket instead of posting in the forums. But I guess if you truly cared then you would know that already. I myself Have done at least one if not both, at the time it was preferable because of anonymity. For the most part though I prefer seeing what others have to say and can be contributed or what the person has to say for themselves or defend themselves.

[juventino]

There is a lot of merit to this, for many reasons. However, the process is like this, so other voices may be heard. Admittedly not all are relevant, but if others noticed similar behavior it is presented, and if others can show its false, it is also helpful.

Its community policing. Typically its obvious if the accusation is pointless, and the accuser looks bad. Mostly the accusation is for a multi, which typically is not meant to be personal, and an apology should usually follow, and for other cases that get more complex, well, while the opinions may not sway the multihunter, they certainly let the community chime in on how they view it, which is kind of the point for most of them.

I think perhaps a stricter policy towards flaming and spamming might be better, but that just causes more work, so really, all you have to do is ignore the useless posts, and the process works fine. Locking the thread would probably do the accused more harm than good alot of times, especially if they are completely innocent.

Well, I do agree to some point if not all. I know useless posts and threads take alot of energy from the mods, perhaps it has contribute to the recent debacle in the forum.

If more facts and thought would go into the first post I think we can get a more clear regulation. I have understod that in many cases (not all of course but some) The multihunters or abusehunter only skimread (if even that) the thread so perhaps this is not necessary.

But my second point is still valid (even though I still havent abandoned my first).

I think in order to make everything more fair, it is best to let the accused address the accussation in the thread or to the hunters before any "judgement" is done.

And you might say; "fill in an eticket". But sadly it doesnt work so well. I think the mods are not eager to change a ruling they have made. It should be able to be heard at an early stage.

[jefjef]

E tickets do work and some decisions are over turned.... jammyjames points dumping & multi was reviewed and reversed after I filed an E ticket. And strife has a valid point. My last multi complaint I had pm'd a moderator in re of it & posted it based on the mods recommendation.... Maybe a system can be installed that before a complaint is posted it must be submitted to a mod for review & then the mod can allow it to be posted if found NOT to be entirely unfounded.

[juventino]

E tickets do work and some decisions are over turned.... jammyjames points dumping & multi was reviewed and reversed after I filed an E ticket. And strife has a valid point. My last multi complaint I had pm'd a moderator in re of it & posted it based on the mods recommendation.... Maybe a system can be installed that before a complaint is posted it must be submitted to a mod for review & then the mod can allow it to be posted if found NOT to be entirely unfounded.

Ofcourse e-tickets work at some cases. But I think it would be best to have more cards on the table (sorry the bad analogy) before they make a ruling. I think, only my opinion, that e-tickets work at some extent but they are limited. What would be so horrible in giving the accuse a chance to be heard before a ruling?

I do think it is horrible (strong word) and strange that they arent.

[juventino]

Well, you should know that you can PM mods(Preferably Multi Hunters) or send an e-ticket instead of posting in the forums. But I guess if you truly cared then you would know that already. I myself Have done at least one if not both, at the time it was preferable because of anonymity. For the most part though I prefer seeing what others have to say and can be contributed or what the person has to say for themselves or defend themselves.

Well, cant argue with you there, only alittle. Seems like a good way to do it even if i would like to know my accuser if i am accused.

Not sure but i think we agree on the second part? That the person should be heard before any ruling (atleast a negative one)?

[colton24]

Well, you should know that you can PM mods(Preferably Multi Hunters) or send an e-ticket instead of posting in the forums. But I guess if you truly cared then you would know that already. I myself Have done at least one if not both, at the time it was preferable because of anonymity. For the most part though I prefer seeing what others have to say and can be contributed or what the person has to say for themselves or defend themselves.

Well, cant argue with you there, only alittle. Seems like a good way to do it even if i would like to know my accuser if i am accused.

Not sure but i think we agree on the second part? That the person should be heard before any ruling (atleast a negative one)?

big time