Lower warning levels for forum rules

[Aimcac]

I've noticed that staff warn alot and most of them are very high for minor things like useless post or something. Warnings should go down faster, less warnings and a more happy community . CIT is the only forum i've been too that gives such high warnings, decrease them please and I believe everyone else will be better. Less programmed warnings and maybe more verbals

[Charly]

If someone gets muted on forum is because he made a mistake 3 times (25% per warning).. For me that's okay, because when I get warned I try to do not post and it helps me to do not repeat it again.. If it gets decreased all people will post with no sense.

[Aimcac]

If someone gets muted on forum is because he made a mistake 3 times (25% per warning).. For me that's okay, because when I get warned I try to do not post and it helps me to do not repeat it again.. If it gets decreased all people will post with no sense.

People who lack sense get banned the very day they do retarded things, players who are good in general but just made bad mistakes shouldn't deserve a long, agonizing wait in order to have respect again.

[jessdajester]

Its not even easy to receive warnings you know how many I have total in all my time here? 2 warnings issued, 1 I think was removed the other I got for posting a ban appeal for someone else.

So come on its not like its impossible to avoid warnings just don't post stupid shit and read board rules rofl

[Dennos]

Hasn't this been suggested already? I'm sure this idea won't get approved because this forum has got a lot of people in it and the stupidity needs to be contained. Our beloved community won't get any happier if the useless posts that are made start to increase in a large percentage, which most likely will if this idea is brought to life.
Downvoting!

[Charly]

Hasn't this been suggested already? I'm sure this idea won't get approved because this forum has got a lot of people in it and the stupidity needs to be contained. Our beloved community won't get any happier if the useless posts that are made start to increase in a large percentage, which most likely will if this idea is brought to life.
Downvoting!

No, it's not the same idea, Aimcac is talking about giving lower warning levels, the other guy suggested a faster decreasing of warning level, and it is not the same.

[Dennos]

No, it's not the same idea, Aimcac is talking about giving lower warning levels, the other guy suggested a faster decreasing of warning level, and it is not the same.

But it still has the same purpose and that purpose is to give punishments for minor mistakes that will end more quickly.

[SeparatistAlliance]

Got to agree with you,there are alot of newbie people who just keep getting punished on forums,and for someone who's secound language is English,isn't so easy to understand the forum rules + rules of every board.
I made this list about lowering warning levels and your suggestion and I think it is fair,and this is what I suggest  :
                                                                                                                                            For breaking forum rules  number 6,11,12,13 or 15 should be warned with +10% warning level
                                                                                                                                            For breaking forum rules  number 3,7,8,9,14 or 18 should be warned with +20% warning level
                                                                                                                                            For breaking forum rules number 1,2,4,5,10,16,17 or 19 should be warned with +15% warning level
This is the system of warning levels I suggest,what do you think guys ?

Upvote

[Claire]

This suggestion is connected with this, eh?

I liked Inferno's one though. But looks like Arran preferred lowering warning level instead. Though I think that'd be much more work to do to change the whole warning system. Here is the thing, warning or ban issued is based on opinion. i.e. Some admin warn people 15% for useless post, some other 25%. Some admin warn 50% for a flame, some other for a mute  (even 100%).

There's no fixed automated system because the level of "useless-ness"/"flame-ness" of a post is different with each other.  So basically with lowering warning level issued, you have to change the whole standard. For example, yet it takes approx. 2 warnings for someone to get watched; so if it changed to 10% then it would take 5x of warnings for someone to get watched and 7x to get a mute. Basically they have more chances to break rules before getting watched or mute. That means then you have to change the watched and mute standards too. So in summary, by lowering warning level you have to change admins' habit and rules of issuing warning level & tweaking the moderation & mute standards too; which are complicated, again because warnings are based on perspective of the issuer.

So I think that making a faster decreasing warning level per day would be much more efficient & effective too. Because no matter what the warning level is; if decreasing rate is changed too i.e. to 5%, people will only need max. 20 days to clear it off. If that's not too much already.

But whatever, I support everything about a less super strict warning system. So upvoted then.

[lawlietpay]

IMO, this is kinda unnecessary. You just can appeal here If you think an administrator gave you a too high warning level or an unjustified mute. Also, they are administrators and they now what are they doing. If they gave a high warning level, they must know why they did it.  Downvoted.

Also, this

So come on its not like its impossible to avoid warnings just don't post stupid shit and read board rules rofl

[Aimcac]

Let's not forget that cit is just a 'game' and majority of our time should be spent 'in-game'. Responding to claire's opinion, then with this suggestion comes a standard warning system like its ingame counterpart. It is easy to avoid breaking rules yes I agree but when you do break them the punishments are kinda harsh. 

[#TheCopSlayer]

IMO, this is kinda unnecessary. You just can appeal here If you think an administrator gave you a too high warning level or an unjustified mute. Also, they are administrators and they now what are they doing. If they gave a high warning level, they must know why they did it.  Downvoted.

Also, this

Well most of the time, it's pointless trying to appeal a warning because of the situation, person who issued it (indeed) or you accept that you deserve it. So let's say you were warned, and you understand why and agree that it was sort of deserved. You have almost a month (just a 5 day difference) to wait until you're "clear" and feel good and being around the forum.

Really, warning percentages should vary according to the rule that's broken. It's simply ridiculous that a warning level as high as 25% be given for making a little useless post, while people who are actually nasty to others, or post offending content are dealt with the same way (most of the time). Also, sometimes we as humans can make mistakes, and usually (if you were to apply this to our forum) that results in people double posting (but can't remove their post because they're JCM or less), making unintentional useless posts (maybe it wasn't useless to them?--personal experience), or post things that have already been posted (people edit their posts and sometimes your post wasn't exactly like theirs...until they edited their post...).

So really, the point here is that breaking certain rules shouldn't count against someone as harshly as other rules. 25% for flaming? Yeah, I think that's right. 25% for posting "certain videos/pictures that belong in incognito mode"? Hell yes, hand it to me. However, to those of you who are looking down on us who are following this suggestion, warnings make us look and feel dumb. And having that fucking annoying green triangle follow us wherever we go makes us feel worse. Warning levels misidentify us as...mindless uncivilized apes.

We're more than just mindless uncivilized apes.

So there. Yes, being more careful is probably the best measure to take, but what about that one time when you might accidentally slip?

-tried my best not to write an essay-
 

[PsyChO_o]

Everyday many guys are playing in CIT server for the first time.And when they start playing it regularly they start using the forum.I know everyone should read the forum rules but many doesn't even know that.And I saw sometimes new guys in forum gets muted or even ban for some simple mistakes like posting useless stuffs or sending "PM" to Admin.How about lowering into 10% ? Its appropriate.

Up Voted

[Uardo.]

Well the problem here is that Staffs doesn't issue the same level of warn for the same rule, a simple example:
In this ScreenShot, xb0x warned twice for the same rule but once 25% and the other time 10% because depends on what this guy posted or did. They will have to review all rules and set for each one of them an exact percentage that will be issued if it is broken!

[JackZo]

I think it doesn't matter How many warn or punishments you got , it depend on your rules breaking or How big your breaking , the staff should know how to warn or punish them , by the way you should not edit the rules that CITs already pend on it .