Staffing RP Warning Systems

[Sage 289]

In any roleplay, problem members come up. Either they disrupt threads and plots, negatively influence the community, attack other members, etc. So how do you deal with it? I'm wondering specifically about warning systems, either those systems built into forum software or systems you created on your own. Have you ever set these up and actually used them? What was your process? Do you use a three strike rule, or is it more, or less, involved? And what constitutes an "official" warning, as opposed to a more informal talk?

 

I'm also wondering how you communicated this system to your member base in a way that wasn't threatening until it needed to be. You don't want your members to get anxious and paranoid every time a staff member wants to talk to them about something that's probably totally unrelated! So how do you, as staff, implement a warning system while still making yourself approachable? Or do you keep this entire system internal until you have to use it?

[Rune 1,099]

CW tries so, so hard to be laid back.

 

Usually an "official" warning comes from the rarely-used staff account so that no individual can claim it's one staff member playing favorites or some such nonsense. I think we've used this twice. 

 

Unofficial warnings will come from any staff member and usually are just a "Hey, stop that." kind of thing done as one individual to another. We don't really do three strikes, but we do keep track of every warning (official and otherwise) issued and most of them aren't issued unless all staff have reached the same conclusion. I think the last warning we issued was an unofficial one because someone kept asking in the Cbox for people to critique/edit their "book." Had to let them know that we were here to write our own stuff and while they could approach people privately, doing it in that fashion was makin' shit weird.

 

Don't really do a three strike system. Most people ragequit after an unofficial warning for whatever reason. If they don't and do stick around, usually the problem is either solved or they go balls to the walls and get banned. It varies wildly but it does take some effort to get banned. In three years we've banned three people. One was harassing members, one went surprise racist in the cbox and the third was harassing staff/stalking them. They were fun.

[Uaithne 543]

I've never implemented an actual warning system.  I just tell people to chill (or whatever) when the time comes up, and I do keep track of the things I say because if I don't, I find that I allow people to walk all over me.

 

If I see a site that has a 3-strike system, I become skeptical of the administration skills.  My personal belief is that not every rule breakage is equal, and to have such a system implies that the administrator believes it is.  Even if someone isn't posting filthy, degrading content or spamming with porn (which many sites with the 3-strike rule acknowledge as being exceptions to their rules, but not all), once can't assume that the rule breakages are the same.

 

Personally, I look to see if I can find a motive or reason why the rule was broken.  I'm not going to punish someone who broke a rule because they speak English as a second language and didn't interpret it appropriately the same way that I'd punish someone who willingly broke the same rule while flaunting it in my face.  Obviously I can't always tell the difference and there's a lot of grey involved, but that's just a general example.

 

Similarly, if someone isn't breaking a rule but they are antagonizing, I'll still do something about it even if there is no written rule against it.

 

So this probably wasn't super helpful.  I haven't had enough problem members recently to develop an actual system for it (thankfully), but I find that too much rigidity doesn't allow for compassion and understanding.

[Morrigan 1,826]

I've actually only in the past 6 or so months really learned the value of the "official" warning system of IPS. To me using the official "warning" system always felt like I was being more tyrannical than I wanted to come off but after using it (at least the IPS v4 one don't know about JCinks) I'm never going back to sending PM messages.

 

For me PM messages can get lost, you don't get a firm "I read this and understand" from the member. You can only gauge if they respond and try to fight you or if they respond and say okay but if they say nothing then did they just open it and X out?

 

The warning system allows me to write the official information to the member so they understand what they are getting warned about and a note for the moderators that read it, so that they know why, what happened or why I (or the other staff member that did the warning) did what they did. It also gives other staff members the ability to review.it and if necessary debate/revoke (if they have the ability).

 

For me this gives me the ability to review past offenses in a single place etc.

 

Overall I like the centralized nature of the actual warning system.

 

Have I ever used one on a roleplay. I can't recall ever understanding the value of one until recently so I'm going to say... no.

[AlbinoFyre 3]

For the longest time I used a three-strike rule on my site. I admit this. It took me dealing with some serious issues of "well, this person is a problem but they've never been warned so it would be unfair..." to realize that I had to be more firm and decisive when it came to dealing with people who were causing genuine disruptions to my boards. Now, that said, I will try to pull the person causing trouble to the side (so to speak) via PMs and talk to them if I believe it's a case of them not realizing what they're doing is bothering others or something like that. If someone is being a serious problem I'll usually jump straight to an official warning. I try my best to not go straight to telling someone to get off my board without a really good reason. I've started treating everything on a case-by-case basis is what it all boils down to.