The Permaban Penalty

[Harijan]

Twill - I understand and respect your position. As a paying customer I want you to know I disagree with your position.

Punishment Disclosure

There are many more than 10 people on this thread who are voicing concern about this issue. True that 10 are being very vocal about it, but there are many one-post replies in support of full disclosure.

No one is questioning Norse's ban anymore. We all like Norse, you like Norse, Norse is GQ, but if you are going to enforce the policy you detailed out in your previous post why not make it official?

When you temp-ban, let them know that it is their 1st, 2nd or 3rd strike. Let them know how close they are to perma-ban (if you insist on the perma-ban). It may even be a good idea to have a public record of bans and how close someone is to perma-ban.

While you may not be abusing your moderator status, you are not always going to be the community manager. The power you have in the forums is pretty extreme. If you don't set public rules and accountability for mods to follow after you are long gone it is inevitable that a mod will abuse this power and that will seriously damage the CC community. From a business perspective it is in your best interest to set and follow public punishment rules.

CC as a Business (as it relates to perma-bans)
And as for the business side of it. By banning Norse you essentially lost a long time customer, and all the revenue that customer was worth, and all the benefit he brought to the site. He ran tourneys, he was very involved in his clan, and the message boards. Overall, CC is not as good a product without Norse.

Now, how many customers did Norse drive away from the site with his random hate speach? None that I know of. Do you know of any paying customers who left, or refunds that had to be given because of Norse?

We all know that a tiny portion of paying CCers actually use the forums, and those that do use the forums are not going to leave because Norse spouts off every once in a while.

Perma-banning in this (and most) situations is bad for business.

[AAFitz]

Perma-banning in this (and most) situations is bad for business.

It is possible that more will be lost than saved. However, it is far more likely that in my opinion, the reduction of negative, and highly offensive postings and personal attacks especially racist ones improve the vast majority of players level of enjoyment. Many, and I'll simply guess, that the majority would like to see all over-the-top posts stopped.

There is no way to gauge the effect of racist attacks on the number of customers exactly. But it isnt hard to assume that every time a player sees an offensive post, or a personal attack it will take a chip out of their enjoyment in playing the game. These chips add up, and take an emotional toll, which is different for everyone. I suspect that less racist posts, personal attacks, and generally negative postings will increase CC's customer base vastly. And that the number that leave because of its suppression will be much less than the number that are retained.

More importantly, some posts and behavior have to be stopped regardless on its affect on the number of players. The management has a responsibility to maintain a certain level of decorum for the majority of players, and in cases of extreme racism, personal attacks, or other obscene behavior that the thought of profit doesn't even factor into the equation, and that they simply try to do what is right, which is what I believe they always try to do.

caffeine

[wicked]

Harijan,
It was made clear to Norse where he was in the escalation of "punishment". Back in November, he was clearly told his next indiscretion would result in a permaban. Yes, we have records of exactly what is sent in the warning/banning PMs. Fast forward to now and since some time had passed, Norse was given one more chance. He was sent an official warning PM where he was told if he messed up again, he would be gone. He then proceeded to post three more racist posts.

Everyone is given the courtesy of being told if they're nearing a permaban.

[firth4eva]

Define racist

[Harijan]

The management has a responsibility to maintain a certain level of decorum for the majority of players, and in cases of extreme racism, personal attacks, or other obscene behavior that the thought of profit doesn't even factor into the equation, and that they simply try to do what is right, which is what I believe they always try to do.

You are making an assumption about management's responsibility. I would argue against that assumption. According to Twill, running a business is managements responsibility, and that means thinking about profit.

You are trying to have a completely different argument than the rest of us. We all know that personal attacks, racist comments, lalalala is going to be controlled on CC. Most of us don't even have a problem with that. It is how these behaviors are controlled that is at issue.

You need to read Twill's post more carefully. Doing what is right is not part of Twill's argument. How to run a business is the basis for the Twill's argument for a permaban penalty. If running an optimal business is your objective then the only time a permaban is warranted is when a customer is causing a net loss for the business.

You and I can speculate all we want about whether Norse caused a net loss, but the problem is we are speculating. No one studied it out and is able to conclusively argue that Norse was causing a net loss. Therefore, Twills argument is fundamentally flawed.

Note: A flawed argument does not mean that Twill is wrong, just that more work needs to be done before Twill can prove the point.

[Harijan]

Harijan,
It was made clear to Norse where he was in the escalation of "punishment". Back in November, he was clearly told his next indiscretion would result in a permaban. Yes, we have records of exactly what is sent in the warning/banning PMs. Fast forward to now and since some time had passed, Norse was given one more chance. He was sent an official warning PM where he was told if he messed up again, he would be gone. He then proceeded to post three more racist posts.

Everyone is given the courtesy of being told if they're nearing a permaban.

Even Norse admits that he was warned of the results of his actions. I think we all want to see something official about how punishments are going to be enforced, and much more clarity about where we all stand.

It is a bit unnerving to think that my next dig on Canadians to get under Prowler's skin could result in even a temp ban.

In addition, there does appear, at least to me, to be some rather unequal enforcement of the rules. I have used plenty of racist, sexist, and otherwise terribly offensive remarks and posts. In all of that I have received a couple of well deserved warnings and never a ban.

Don't get me wrong, I am not looking for the wrath of wicked on my head, but I don't see much difference between some of the stuff Norse was doing and what I do (except for the fact that Norse was much more eloquent than myself).

We just want to know how punishment is going to be doled out. You and Twill do a fine job for the most part IMO, but you guys won't always be the ones in charge. What framework are you putting in place to prevent other mods from abusing the extreme power you have in the forums?

[yeti_c]

You and I can speculate all we want about whether Norse caused a net loss, but the problem is we are speculating. No one studied it out and is able to conclusively argue that Norse was causing a net loss. Therefore, Twills argument is fundamentally flawed.

Note: A flawed argument does not mean that Twill is wrong, just that more work needs to be done before Twill can prove the point.

Your argument about his argument means my argument is not an argument but a discussion and therefore I argue that we should discuss my arguing with some more discussion.

C.

[KoE_Sirius]

You and I can speculate all we want about whether Norse caused a net loss, but the problem is we are speculating. No one studied it out and is able to conclusively argue that Norse was causing a net loss. Therefore, Twills argument is fundamentally flawed.

Note: A flawed argument does not mean that Twill is wrong, just that more work needs to be done before Twill can prove the point.

Your argument about his argument means my argument is not an argument but a discussion and therefore I argue that we should discuss my arguing with some more discussion.

C.

wtf

[Harijan]

Philosophy 101. Any discussion is an argument. Look up the fucking definition of the word before you post your rambling babbleshit.

1. an oral disagreement; verbal opposition; contention; altercation: a violent argument.
2. a discussion involving differing points of view; debate: They were deeply involved in an argument about inflation.
3. a process of reasoning; series of reasons: I couldn't follow his argument.
4. a statement, reason, or fact for or against a point: This is a strong argument in favor of her theory.
5. an address or composition intended to convince or persuade; persuasive discourse.
6. subject matter; theme: The central argument of his paper was presented clearly.
7. an abstract or summary of the major points in a work of prose or poetry, or of sections of such a work.

I was using definitions 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6 take your pick.

[yeti_c]

Philosophy 101. Any discussion is an argument. Look up the fucking definition of the word before you post your rambling babbleshit.

Meh - I'm the one posting "rambling babbleshit"...

C.

[Harijan]

Meh - I'm the one posting "rambling babbleshit"...

C.

Lol, Touche'

[firth4eva]

Define racist.

[hulmey]

go buy yourself a dictionary

[firth4eva]

go buy yourself a dictionary

Ok. I just did and apparently I am not allowed to burn gas or vapor, as from wood or coal, that is undergoing combustion; a portion of ignited gas or vapor outsdie of flame wars. GFY hulmey.

[nagerous]

As an impartial viewer, I'm not happy with this move moderators and would put it on a comparison with the deleting of spamalot. I hope you guys can get your act together and make what I believe would be the best move for the website and undo Norses ban.

[AAFitz]

The management has a responsibility to maintain a certain level of decorum for the majority of players, and in cases of extreme racism, personal attacks, or other obscene behavior that the thought of profit doesn't even factor into the equation, and that they simply try to do what is right, which is what I believe they always try to do.

You are making an assumption about management's responsibility. I would argue against that assumption. According to Twill, running a business is managements responsibility, and that means thinking about profit.

You are trying to have a completely different argument than the rest of us. We all know that personal attacks, racist comments, lalalala is going to be controlled on CC. Most of us don't even have a problem with that. It is how these behaviors are controlled that is at issue.

You need to read Twill's post more carefully. Doing what is right is not part of Twill's argument. How to run a business is the basis for the Twill's argument for a permaban penalty. If running an optimal business is your objective then the only time a permaban is warranted is when a customer is causing a net loss for the business.

You and I can speculate all we want about whether Norse caused a net loss, but the problem is we are speculating. No one studied it out and is able to conclusively argue that Norse was causing a net loss. Therefore, Twills argument is fundamentally flawed.

Note: A flawed argument does not mean that Twill is wrong, just that more work needs to be done before Twill can prove the point.

You argued that you thought a perma ban was bad for business. I posted why I disagreed. And my speculation is not blind speculation, its an estimation based on the time Ive spent in these forums, reading other players posts, and other personal discussions.

Twill doesnt have to send out an team to study the effects of a player on its income before banning them. Its absurd to even suggest its necessary for his explanation not to be valid. But it does seem hes answered your questions more directly in his next post. And it seems like a pretty comprehensive answer to me.

[billy07]

is norse banned for good?

Aye he's a proper twat, but some people like an arguement or to be a tad provocative. Myself and norse would not have one good word to say about each other but is this site just wanting drones?

Ban dancing mustard, it will force him to get a life and hopefully pop his cherry.

[Twill]

Firth, quit trolling, you have asked me this before and it has been defined for you, don't try your normal crap in what is otherwise a rather intelligent and meaningful conversation. You only do your cause (I'm assuming you want a different mod policy) harm by playing the ignorant fool. You know what racism means.

Harijan, I appreciate your questions and how thought out there are. So, let me answer them 1 by 1.

If I am correct, the only people who have posted meaningful support of changing the mod policy in this thread amount to six, perhaps 7 or 8 it you count some one-liner jabs at mods in general (you are welcome to count them yourself, I did ). But the number of people disagreeing is immaterial, you bring up valid concerns so let me address the concerns you have currently -
1) Is mod policy based on running a business profitably counter to banning a paying member
2) Punishment disclosure and "I'm afraid of not knowing when I'm getting banned"

1) Moding as a business:

To run a profitable business we need to create both a product and an environment which is pleasing for the majority of the demographic we target. I think we all agree on that.
The product is primarily the game board for most people, it's what they pay for and it's where 85% of all active members spend 95% of their time.
The environment is the community which surrounds the product and that is what we are concerned with here. Think about it this way - You walk into a grocery store that is poorly lit, disorganized and has sticky floors...that wont "drive you away" and you will still get the products you need but it's not the most pleasant shopping experience and if someone opens another grocery store that is more pleasant to shop in, and provides similar products then chances are you will go shop there.
Well, our punishment model exists to keep our lights relatively bright and our floors relatively stick free. (no sexual jokes please)

Norse may not have actively driven members off of the site (although I can think of a few would-be flamers he may have tried to do that with) but he did promote an atmosphere and an environment which is not conducive to the majority of people participating in this community and thus losing out on what I consider a core component of the CC experience and making CC-as-a-product, less appealing and thus less profitable. So, by removing someone who is or was creating a less than pleasant environment for the majority of our paying or potential customers it is, in a business sense, a smart move. (notice how I am avoiding the ethical argument here, which I could quite as easily argue - we don't want that kind of content on here regardless of the market for it...but that is a subjective choice and would lead to a far greater debate which would really only end with "this is the kind of business we want to run, if it fails, it's our own fault" and perhaps a "suck it up cupcake, GFY").

2) Punishment as unexpected

During my sabbatical from the CM position last year there may have been cases where some punishments were overly harsh, arbitrary or unexpected and unexplained. That is my fault for not setting up the system properly before I left and for that I apologize. It has meant that since then there is a very tight and clearly defined policy for how to act, what is expected and when it is expected set up within Team CC.
As you yourself note, you have received several warnings which tell you (or should tell you) what you did wrong, where you did it and what would happen if you did it again. To say that getting a ban at this point would be unexpected is, well, ridiculous. We give every person plenty of chances to clean up and plenty of warning as to what is coming before it comes. We give this to you as an individual rather than a group because, well, nobody really pays any attention to group announcements. For example the rules clearly state that if you do any of the no-nos we will warn you then freeze you for 24 hours then freeze you for longer if necessary. You know what will happen if you break those rules and yet you think they do not apply to you and when you break them and get punished as stated it is a "surprise". And so we warn individually as well, in case of mis-interpretation, accident, bad hair day or last ditch effort to allow repentance.

We warn, if anything, too much and act too little. Like you say, you've gotten away with a lot that you shouldn't have. But when we do act, we are serious about it...so I suggest you don't get to the point where we do act.

I will however be happy to update our guidelines to more explicitly state what you can expect.

I think Hari was the only one who had any coherent and well formed concerns which I needed to clarify, sorry for not being more clear in the initial post. I think I have answered or addressed all of his concerns.

If I missed anything, do let me know
Twill

[Blitzaholic]

i think the mods do their best for the most part, and are fair


i mean if you are crossing a line, or close to it, they will usually give you a heads up or a pm to warn you, i think this is fair, then if one keeps breaking that after the warning, well they have to do something, right? or no one would take them seriously if they didnt do nothing and then this place could get crazy



remember rules followed prevents chaos

[wrestler1ump]

What everybody has been blabbering about for the past 3 pages is what I outlined three pages ago.

[Harijan]

What everybody has been blabbering about for the past 3 pages is what I outlined three pages ago.

Further evidence that no one gives a f*ck about you or what you have to say.

[mandalorian2298]

The way mods punished Norse just proves that strict following of the rules is a poor substitute for critical thinking. Forum rules state that racism is forbiden. In essence this is a good rule which is ment to create a nice hate-free enviorment for users of all races. It is my belief, however, that this rule is to general expressed. For example, if I say that the Latin word for 'black' is 'niger', I am not speaking about races at all. But, there is a posibility that some idiot (in this case it is realy a valid qualification rather then an insult) scans through my post, finds "the N word" and concludes that I am a bad bad racist who should be baned imidiatly.

The second problem I have with this "Fight against RacismTM", is the idea that any statement about the existance of differences between the members of different races is automaticaly equated with racism. Is racism saying that black people have darker skin then white people? No.
What about this statement "In every mayor athletic event, I would bet that a black sprinter will win"? Forget for a moment that I am white. Let's pretend that a Bob, who is black, posted the sentance above. Is he a racist? He is certanly stating that black people are superior in some way to white people. Also, his statement is not 100% correct, since I seem to remember a Greece sprinter winning a Gold Medal in the Olympics a few years ago. So, we are forced to conclude that Bob is a racist.
But, ask yourself this: If you are forced to bet a 100 $ of your own money on the color of the next World Champion in 100m sprint, which way would you bet? Even if you were given an option not to bet at all, you would probably seaze the opportunity for an easy gain by betting that he will be black. This is not racism. You would mearly make a decision based on your past expirience. By same logic, if I were forced to choose between a white, black and Asian American for some job that requires academic education, but without a chance to interview the candidates, I would chose the Asian person because of my belief that the Asian American sub-culture is more oriented towards the academic acomplishent that the rest of the American culture. This is not predjudice. This is accepting the truth as I see it.

Finaly, there is racial stereotyping, which is what got Norse banned, if I understood the situation correctly. However, it must be noticed that not all stereotypes are inspired by hate or even ignorance. Whenever we are making a general statement about a group of people, we are (to greater or lesser degree) stereotyping them. For example, if I say that Bill is tall enough to be a basketball player, I am sterotyping baskeball players. Would you find this to be offensive for baskeball players? Or, am I perhaps offending all the short basketball players (Mugsy Bogues for example)? No, I am simply implying that height is a desirable characteristic for a basketball player. There are indeed short people who are great at playing basketball. But, I would not be wrong to assert that all those players would be even better if they were tall (without diminishing in any of their other attributes like speed or precision). Imagine a 1-on-1 game between Mugsy Bogues and a player who has all the speed and skill of Mugsy Bogues but is also 7'0 (2.10 m) tall! Mind you, I am not making a claim that it is generaly better to be tall then to be short. I am mearly stating that being tall is advantage for a basketball player. This is not a predjudice. It's mearly stating a fact.

In all of my previous examples, I had the advantage of picking the statements that can be substanciated (more or less) by evidence. There are, however statements about the members of different races that are suported with very little if any evidence. There are also, as is the case in any other topic that has been or will be discussed on these forums, some statements that are simply faulty. For instance, I could state that expirience has thaught me that white people are generaly boring compared with Japanese people. This would be faulty, since my expirience with Japanese people consist of my going to school with one Japanese student. In this case, my lack of personal expiriance and faulty logic would cause me to state an outright racistic statement. Should this be punished with a ban? No! The proper punishement would come in the for of some flamer who would point out that my logic is faulty and then proceed to call me an idiot. I would either conciede or start a childish circle of name-calling, but, either way, I don't think that the racial harmony of CC would be seriously imperiled.

In the case of Norse's "Which race should be destroyed" topic, I am pretty sure that it was ment as either a straight out joke or a mear mental excercise, rather then a begining of a fascist regime led by Norse. If Norse has been serious and if he menages to convince a few million idiots to support his war against another culture in an effort to enforce "The Norse Way Of Living", I will admit that I have been wrong, but not before. The fact that someone might have interpreted his topic as a call for racial hate, does not necessarily make this the case. This is where the whole problem lies.

The Mods, IMO, don't care enough about interpreting someone's posts in the correct fashion. All they care about is mentaining the apparence that racism is not tolerated on these forums. It's easier for them to impose their authority by dealing out punishments and stamping out the freedom of speach which has made these forums so great a year ago when I joined. DISCUSSING IDEAS OF ANY KIND IS A GOOD THING! I for one am always interested to hear the reasoning behind the beliefs that are foreign to me. If I find the flaw in that reasoning, I can argue against it, but only if the other person is allowed to expres his/her ideas. This kind of censorship makes a powerfull argument for the racists, by creating an impression that racists are de facto fighting for the freedom of speach!
Do the Mods care that their actions are in fact enpowering racists? No! All they care about is mentaining the illusion that they are doing their job. They don't care about doing the right thing, because they are preocupied with how their actions will look. If you care about how your actions will look to others, you clearly don't know what the hell you are doing.

[decoulombe]

Wow, three more pages since I checked last.

I apologize if I sounded a little too "energetic" in my last posts. As Aafitz alluded to, it gets a little frustrating when your posts are jumped on by three others.

But common guys, really, I've had my own disagreements with the mods. However, from my experience, petitions such as these don't work. Their only success is in bringing frustration and anger between members and closes doors of opportunity. If you really, truly feel that the rules are abusive (a harse word, I know), or not clearly explained out to everybody, send a kind note in the suggestions/ bug reports forum. Maybe, you could even help the mods rewrite the rules to make them clearer.

There is a lot of unrecognized talent here at CC. This comes back to that volunteering to make this site (your site) a better place for everybody, which Twill, Lack, and the mods all want. If you truly feel there is a problem with the site, advise and offer to fix it. (Yes, last I hear, CC was looking for some volunteers) After rereading the topic two times (headache), there actually might be some good ideas, but these ideas will never go into action if you continuously "badmouth" the mods about unfair rules and punishments. They will close there "mod door" in front of you and you will never get the opportunity to say "Hey, I've made CC a better place to be."

The world is filled with unrecognized genius, because those with genius have no idea how to share it with the world.

[Lucky Se7en]

Why not just keep banning him for long periods of time? A permanent ban seems a little unreasonable.

[Beastly]

Beastly, you'll be happy to know we now send out links or quotes or both when warning someone. Yes we were lax on it before, apologies for that. If there's EVER a question as to what you did, and the mod who warned you can't/doesn't answer that to your satisfaction, PM Twill directly. Or better yet, stay outta trouble in the first place.

Well, I guess the system is perfect Now!

If someone is warned where they are going wrong, and are told it won't be tolerated on this site, after repeated offenses they should be banned.

IF norse was to stupid to take heed, no matter what kind of a nice guy he is, then he deserves what he has coming.

The mods are running the site the way the administrator/s want them to.