You have the right to express your emotions and opinions, wether they are negative or positive. But if by doing so, you are being hurtful to someone else, then you are infringing upon the rights of that person to feel safe. Or if you prefer, if your freedom impedes on the rights of others, then your freedom isn't any better than a dictatorship.
True, it is nuanced. There is a line to be drawn and it's not always obvious. But I think that while that line can be blurry at times, it should be easy to identify the extremes of a situation and take proper action. I believe that moderators on many forums are a bit too lenient and could do with some bit less of tolerance. But at other times, they can be unforgiving and cold hearted.
There's no middleground anymore. Mods are either too soft or too harsh. Call me a fool or a dreamer, but I think that the best course of action in any kind of rule infringing a mod may face is to give 3 chances to the rule breaker to redeem himself, no more, no less. Also, the consequences should be progressively bigger instead of assigning a value to an offence.
A good example of what I mean would be as such:
First violation = 1 warning
The person is warned and should have realised that he shouldn't do it again if he doesn't want further actions to be taken against him.
Second violation = Temporary ban of one month
The person has persisted and has received the time of a whole month to reflect on his actions and reform his ways.
If he is caught bypassing the ban, extend the ban to one year and block his ip.
Third violation = Temporary ban of one year
The person has shown that he's not mature enough to be on the forum atm. This one year ban is a sort of last chance to make said person grow up. If he is caught bypassing the ban, extend the ban indefinetely and block his ip.
After which, if he hasn't learned yet, the person would be banned forever. They actually still do it on some really old forums. But hey, call me a nostalgic, call me whatever you like, there's a reason why those old forums are still around...
True, it is nuanced. There is a line to be drawn and it's not always obvious. But I think that while that line can be blurry at times, it should be easy to identify the extremes of a situation and take proper action. I believe that moderators on many forums are a bit too lenient and could do with some bit less of tolerance. But at other times, they can be unforgiving and cold hearted.
There's no middleground anymore. Mods are either too soft or too harsh. Call me a fool or a dreamer, but I think that the best course of action in any kind of rule infringing a mod may face is to give 3 chances to the rule breaker to redeem himself, no more, no less. Also, the consequences should be progressively bigger instead of assigning a value to an offence.
A good example of what I mean would be as such:
First violation = 1 warning
The person is warned and should have realised that he shouldn't do it again if he doesn't want further actions to be taken against him.
Second violation = Temporary ban of one month
The person has persisted and has received the time of a whole month to reflect on his actions and reform his ways.
If he is caught bypassing the ban, extend the ban to one year and block his ip.
Third violation = Temporary ban of one year
The person has shown that he's not mature enough to be on the forum atm. This one year ban is a sort of last chance to make said person grow up. If he is caught bypassing the ban, extend the ban indefinetely and block his ip.
After which, if he hasn't learned yet, the person would be banned forever. They actually still do it on some really old forums. But hey, call me a nostalgic, call me whatever you like, there's a reason why those old forums are still around...
![[-]](http://agarioforums.net/images/collapse.png)