A couple of times during the year, I am devoting a post to reporting on the Community Guidelines, and putting the system up for public discussion so that users can weigh in on how they may feel the existing system could be refined and improved.
The system currently runs as follows (and has since the system's inception in August, 2005): Standards of behavior are as outlined in AN's "Community Guidelines" link, and if any user feels a violation has occurred he/she can report it to a sub-committee of four AN members, who vote independently on whether or not a violation has occurred. A "clear majority" (at least 3-1) is required for a strike to be issued. In 5 months now, there have been a total of 25 complaints, resulting in 15 "strikes" issued plus 4 trolls being identified (and banned).
This thread is your chance to give input for Blez, me, and AN's sub-committee to read and consider. Feel free, of course, to comment on any aspect of the CGV (Community Guidelines Violation) system, but here are a few possible "conversation starters," some of them general and a couple based on questions users have raised privately since the last public discussion...
- Is the CGV system basically working/How could it be improved?
- Is the CGV system basically fair/How could it be more fair?
- Are there offenses you feel should be deleted from the current list of CGVs?
- Are there offenses you feel should be added to the current list of CGVs?
- Should a strike, like a car insurance "point," roll off after a certain amount of time (e.g., after 6 months), so that users have the chance to earn back a clean slate over time?
- I've heard from many users who say they stay away from the game-threads when the A's are losing, because of some of the comments that appear; do any changes need to be made, for the 2006 season, specifically in regards to game-thread etiquette?