Rule Proposal for Rule Violation Reports Thread

[AKM sama]

A member who does not feel comfortable sharing this publicly himself, has come up with a proposal for a rule for our Rule Violation Reports Thread:

"Hey AKM,
Sorry to bother you but I have a proposal for a rule that I don't feel too comfortable sharing publicly.
I don't think non-staff should be allowed to comment in the Rule Violation Reports thread unless they...

• are making a report
• have direct involvement in a report
• have relevant information on a report that has not been brought up yet

I've seen it occur on far too many occasions where regular users continue to constantly try to get involved into situations that have no direct relation to themselves either to say something witty, to rile up a person directly involved in a report, or to make a meaningless joke and it ends up derailing and worsening the situation every time. I've seen staff constantly warn people too stop derailing the RVR thread yet it continues to happen over and over again. I mean, we literally have users just walk into the thread and write something along the lines of Time to get out the popcorn.

These kind of comments obviously serve no help to the thread and given the absurd frequency of this being an issue in the thread, I think it'd be best to just write an outright rule about it."

---

Obviously, I agree with it. All the problems outlined above are very real and happen far too often, despite us making it clear in the OP that people who derail the RVRT can get temporary bans (which is not enforced at all). I think it will help if we make a full-fledged rule like what is suggested above and enforce it more strictly.

What are your thoughts?
@Antvasima @Promestein @DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality @DarkDragonMedeus @SomebodyData @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Mr._Bambu @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @Dino_Ranger_Black @JustSomeWeirdo @Theglassman12 @Crabwhale @Eficiente @The_Impress @GyroNutz @DarkGrath @The_Wright_Way @Moritzva @Firestorm808 @DemonGodMitchAubin @Everything12 @Duedate8898 @Planck69 @KingTempest @QuasiYuri @Armorchompy @CrimsonStarFallen @UchihaSlayer96 @Confluctor @Hop_Hoppington-Hoppenhiemer @Shadowbokunohero @Crazylatin77 @Jvando @Zaratthustra @Just_a_Random_Butler @ElixirBlue @Tllmbrg @Nehz_XZX @Amelia_Lonelyheart @Executor_N0 @Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan @Therefir @DMUA @Jasonsith @KieranH10 @Migue79 @Psychomaster35 @CloverDragon03 @KLOL506 @M3X @Dark-Carioca @AbaddonTheDisappointment @The_Divine_Phoenix @ZackMoon1234 @MistaClean @MonkeyOfLife

 

[Qawsedf234]

Obviously, I agree with it. All the problems outlined above are very real and happen far too often, despite us making it clear in the OP that people who derail the RVRT can get temporary bans (which is not enforced at all). I think it will help if we make a full-fledged rule like what is suggested above and enforce it more strictly.

Its a different situation, but if your being pulled into a HR thing at work they don't allow just anyone in there. Only other HR members or someone directly in charge of you.

In a similar fashion, I agree with the bullet points. If someone isn't actively effected by a report or has some vital piece of information they shouldn't be talking and we do need to be harsher on actually doing temp bans.

 

[Confluctor]

Yeah I can agree to setting rules for that thread. It gets pretty hectic at times.

 

[KLOL506]

Aye. Seems fine at a glance.

 

[Starter_Pack]

I stand by this proposition.

RVT is likely our most serious thread on the forum, and yet it keeps being bombarded by the peanut gallery. Locking down its rules is a very good option to go by here.

 

[Armorchompy]

I definitely agree, we have way too many smartasses in here sometimes.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

This rule makes sense to me. People talking about "Getting out the Popcorn" or "This is gonna be good" or "This should be fun" hold no purpose in the thread. And the rule should go double of the regular user being reported is the one saying comments like that.

 

[Damage3245]

I definitely agree with this.

 

[ByAsura]

I agree, especially since it always seems to be one particularly large group of people who are just hanging around.

 

[AbaddonTheDisappointment]

Yeah I agree this would be good for keeping the thread from getting cluttered

 

[UchihaSlayer96]

Yes, this seems like a great proposal. I agree.

 

[Nehz_XZX]

I don't have much involvement with the Rule Violations Report Thread and I do not actually know much about it. The idea of having rules for it makes sense for me though given its nature.

 

[First_Witch]

I wholeheartly agree to this rule. It has been proven time and time again that most people are drawn to drama and arguments. It was at times so bad that, if you could filter the RVR thread for actual relevant post, it would most likely shrink to more than half.

I too understand why it was so hard to enforce this rule before. No one wants to play the "villain", warning and banning people for technically harmless things. But it is important to remember that snarky behavior like this create pointless bad blood within the community, a place already prone for childish drama.

 

[DontTalkDT]

Makes sense.

 

[Planck69]

Definitely agree with this rule.

 

[KingTempest]

Easily agree with this

 

[Armorchompy]

(Also, while I hope and think it won't happen much, we should also punish staff members who act in such ways)

 

[LordGriffin1000]

I agree as well.

 

[SamanPatou]

I also agree.

 

[Antvasima]

This seems to make sense to me, but I don't want us to hand out long bans to otherwise well-behaved members just because they are being stupid.

Maybe blocking them for 1-3 days depending on the severity of the infraction, combined with deleting the interfering posts, while being very careful to not apply IP blocks in combination, would be enough?

 

[Damage3245]

Short blocks, which can be escalated if it proves to be repeating behaviour, sounds fine to me.

 

[Armorchompy]

Definitely, everyone can make missteps, we just should take steps to discourage them.

 

[Valiant_Abyss]

This seems to make sense to me, but I don't want us to hand out long bans to otherwise well-behaved members just because they are being stupid.

Maybe blocking them for 1-3 days depending on the severity of the infraction, combined with deleting the interfering posts, while being very careful to not apply IP blocks in combination, would be enough?

The intent is not to hand out multi-month bans to every person who makes a peep, the intent is just to write out that 'here are the clear rules on what you should not do, don't fool around in this thread or punishments will follow'

Pretty much what Armor said.

 

[Elizhaa]

It seems fine; I guess the rules could codify usage of reply ban and also elaborate on short ban's usage if needed.

 

[MistaClean]

Eh, sure.

 

[Antvasima]

Definitely, everyone can make missteps, we just should take steps to discourage them.

The intent is not to hand out multi-month bans to every person who makes a peep, the intent is just to write out that 'here are the clear rules on what you should not do, don't fool around in this thread or punishments will follow'

Pretty much what Armor said.

Okay. To me, that seems fine to apply then.

 

[ElixirBlue]

I would agree. Don’t really use RVT for anything but to report/figure something out in coherent with the rules, anyways.

 

[JustSomeWeirdo]

Huge agree

 

[CloverDragon03]

Agree with this. I've seen the thread get derailed too much

 

[MonkeyOfLife]

I agree, tho there will be users who say they didn't know or didn't see the rule and stuff, what happens to them? A warning or a small block?

Personally adding (Serious) or something to the thread title might help as well, they should be able to see it and know adding unnecessary comments isn't ok in a serious thread.

 

[Crabwhale]

Fully agree and should've been done before.

 

[Antvasima]

This has apparently been accepted then.

Is somebody willing to write a draft text that I can add to the first post of the RVR thread? (I will also post in it in the regular manner.)

 

[Eficiente]

Yes to more professionalism.

 

[Sir_Ovens]

I've never seen a more unanimous staff decision.

That being said, I agree.

 

[Abstractions]

I'm fine with this, I suppose.

 

[The_Impress]

This seems to make sense to me, but I don't want us to hand out long bans to otherwise well-behaved members just because they are being stupid.

Maybe blocking them for 1-3 days depending on the severity of the infraction, combined with deleting the interfering posts, while being very careful to not apply IP blocks in combination, would be enough?

We can maybe threadban 'em by the way, for a week or so.

 

[Colonel_Krukov]

I agree. I also like the idea of thread banning like Impress suggests.

 

[Valiant_Abyss]

I’m not sure what thread banning is supposed to do. They’re already not supposed to be talking in the thread unless they’re doing one of the 3 outlined things.

 

[The_Impress]

I’m not sure what thread banning is supposed to do. They’re already not supposed to be talking in the thread unless they’re doing one of the 3 outlined things.

...thus they're not talking anymore once we threadban them. Problem solved.

 

[First_Witch]

Time them out for a couple hours, its not rocket science.