Site Suggestion: Show reason for strike given on home page

If a user gets a strike, they just get a red X next to their username without any notification or anything. This would leave people to figure out why they got the strike and wonder how it happened, and keep asking the mods/admins why. The "Strikes" panel would appear between the Arcades button and the last 10 posts panel, and will only appear if logged on. It would also show the expiration date of the strike(s), which is 28 days from receiving them.

It would be better to show why was the strike given on the home page when logged in. The strike reasons would only be shown to the user currently having strikes. It could be something like this:

Strike 1: "You have created unnecessary drama in the forums trying to seek for attention. Because of this, you have recieved your first strike."
Strike 2: "For misbehaving in chat badly/giving unfair ratings. This is your second strike; one more and you're banned."
Strike 3: "For spamming and insulting other members. Because this is your third strike, you are now banned."

---

We'd need to change the actual method of handing out strikes in the first place. Currently it's just "press a button and it's done", without having to state why.

To be honest, I don't see why you'd need an explanation anyway, whenever I hand one out (and I don't very often at all) I always give a warning before I do. If you don't heed the warning, you're getting a strike.

---

OK...

There could also be the option to appeal the strike (make the mods/admin redecide), if the user thinks he/she got the strike for no reason (or did nothing) and wants to remove it. Which would also appear under each strike on the strikes panel.

But, if the original decision on the strike is still confirmed, if the user gets a second strike, it cannot be appealed for 7 days.

---

The PM system is just fine for the first option.

The second option is purely double jeopardy. I can't speak for everyone but I certainly don't give strikes unless they are truly deserved so any appeal chance is going to be low, an an extra punishment strike for the crime of standing up for yourself makes no sense at all.

Besides, only you see a strike if you get one, after 90 days they're gone anyway, so just wait them out. If you're not going to do anything that will warrant a strike, there's nothing to worry about. And if you were going to, well, tough, that's how discipline works.

---

I must've missed the warning when I got one. :accusingeyes:

---

I wholeheartedly agree with this, but I don't think 1033Forest meant that there should be a second strike for a failed appeal. From what I read, he wants to talk about the following scenario.

1. A user currently has an active strike that was appealed, but whose appeals were rejected.
2. Said user commits a separate strikeable offence (not from appealing), leading to a second strike.
3. This second strike is not subject to appeal for 7 days, allowing the user to really think for whether a dispute is justified.
4. This 7-day wait does not apply to past rejected appeals for strikes issued a long time ago and have expired.

While I do not necessarily agree with this particular proposal, I can see some merit to it. It's like a "think twice before you claim a strike is unjust" mechanism to those who regularly offend yet appeal without discipline.




Now for my own opinion on the suggestion as a whole: I believe the disclosure of reasons for a strike sounds good from the perspectives of convenience and learning. Obviously, most users who care about their conduct on the site will send a PM to mods or admins about them. However, it takes time to reply to such PMs, like any other PMs. While the system is arguably fine as is, you will always have that one annoying user who will keep spamming private messages but will not learn from their mistakes.

It's also worth noting that not all users on this site are comfortable with approaching a staff member, especially if said staff issued them a strike. These users are likely to do nothing but build hostility and resentment towards the person whom issued them a strike, rather than to voice their concerns.

And most fundamentally of all, you'd give out a strike to get users to discipline themselves for poor conduct. In this case, a reason display can serve warned users as a constant reminder of what it is they should watch out for during the strike period, allowing them to work on it rather than to simply wait it out and possibly offend again.

I like how you wrote that perhaps the way strikes are given need some changes. I don't say this to be accusing of anyone (not at all) but only to be realistic. It's entirely possible at times for a staff to overreact to one thing a user writes, giving them a strike (or possibly multiple strikes) without due warning. Like all people, it's possible for staff to make judgments in error at times, whether out of emotion or false interpretation. Unfortunately, users who feel that they received an unfair strike is likely to simply resent staff rather than to try to learn, as I wrote above. If a reason system were to be put in place, maybe it may give staff members in general an opportunity 1) to think through whether or not a user truly deserves a strike, and 2) to remind users why they deserve the discipline. Not just at the time the strike was issued, but throughout the strike period as well.

Again, just my thoughts on the matter. Thanks for reading.

---

Yeah, what I have basically done is think that skim reading is good enough for one line of text. This is dumb. I am being a dumb. Actual response coming tonight, at a time when I'm not pretending to work. Either way, the general gist I think is that we don't give out enough strikes to warrant a change in the system, anything we're raising at the moment from this side of the fence seems to be more of a hypothetical 'what if' scenario than anything likely to happen.

---

Fair enough. I don't know how often you issue strikes to people, but I'm just putting that out there in case any of you ever want to think about what could possibly go wrong, and what to do when you do have to deal with them. I'll look forward to your actual response.

---

Since I was able to in 2013, I think I have issued four.

So...yeah.

---

you fucking MONSTER alex

---