Subject:
|
Re: Warnings( was: WAKE UP!)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:25:39 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5885 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Suzanne Rich Green wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Kelly McKiernan wrote:
> > In lugnet.people, Ross Crawford wrote:
> > > [snip]
> > > Actually, that raises another question. Should admins disregard
> > > advice/warnings given by others (non-admins and admins in non-admin role) in
> > > making decisions about timeouts/bans? Seems to me they should count for
> > > {something}, though exactly how they should be taken into account is not an
> > > easy question to answer.
> > >
> > > ROSCO
> >
> > In my experience, mod/admin decisions should be made based on official
> > warnings rather than peer recommendations, which may be biased or incomplete.
> > For instance, having 5 people say "Don't do that" about something is not as
> > effective as a site admin saying the same thing, especially when the admin
> > can cite reasons why they shouldn't, or state what the consequences of
> > repeated infranctions would be. In many cases, the admin could point to a
> > particularly well-written statement from another member and say, "that's
> > why," and it would be official at that point, but not before. That also
> > allows the admin to make decisions about the entire thread, including
> > warning/suspending other members who may have also stepped over the line,
> > regardless of who or what they were arguing for or about.
> >
> > This assumes a couple of things that may not be relevant on LUGNET at this
> > time: one, that members acquiesce to admin authority; and two, that there is
> > proactive admin presence and activity.
> >
> > {Kelly}
>
> Another question: Assumming the rules are stated and understood by all, and
> "sentences" are fairly standardized, need non-admins be informed of the duration
> of something like a time-out? I worry about this because I don't want to see
> people beating up on a user while they're unable to defend themselves, nor do I
> want their return to be marked as an event. In the past, I've not told other
> people. Thus there was no feeling of obligation on part of the returning user to
> "mark" their return. Do you know what I mean?
I do indeed understand. Another issue, especially with the long absense of
Adminship, is to restore the feeling that there is law and order. That happens
with people seeing consequences. If Eric had just suddenly stopped posting,
there would be no way to know whether it was a punishment or if Eric's internet
got cut-off. It important to the rest of us to know that if we step too far out
of line, that there will be consequences.
-Lenny
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Warnings( was: WAKE UP!)
|
| (...) Another question: Assumming the rules are stated and understood by all, and "sentences" are fairly standardized, need non-admins be informed of the duration of something like a time-out? I worry about this because I don't want to see people (...) (18 years ago, 4-Apr-06, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
42 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
