BMMJ

[Psyko]

It's really easy to find out if said person got a warning...

all you have to do is look at the users warning count before you report and then after...

But that requires effort.

[RoKeT]

It's really easy to find out if said person got a warning...

all you have to do is look at the users warning count before you report and then after...

But that requires effort.

as a user how can you ask Mod's to put in effort if your not willing to put in that little bit

[Psyko]

It's really easy to find out if said person got a warning...

all you have to do is look at the users warning count before you report and then after...

But that requires effort.

as a user how can you ask Mod's to put in effort if your not willing to put in that little bit

Hush! Do not speak such logical nonsense! Someone might see this. Then where would we be?!

[Mordack]

It would lead to greater transparency, but unfortunately it would also lead to greater idiocy. People always jump to wild and inaccurate conclusions about the dreaded B word, and more information would lead to more conclusions. Each undoubtedly wilder and less coherent than the last.

For example, say I warn a member of XXX alliance for masking in a war thread. Afterwards, I realize I've had one too much pina coladas and toddle off to bed. Two seconds later a member of YYY alliance, their dreaded opposition, does the same thing. Almost immediately, XXX alliance would denounce me as a YYY sympathizer. Their secret plant in the mod ranks. A double agent. Double oh six. When in reality, all I did was go to bed.

People would see patterns which aren't there, and find bias in events which can be explained through perfectly rational means. I'm not saying it's a bad thing. I'm used to people being idiots. I'm sure most mods are. I can foresee is as a potential consequence, though.

[Jack]

As I've said bang times before. There are periods when large numbers of people from allied alliances end up warned/banned. This has nothing to do with bias, it is a result of the herd effect.

[BMMJ13]

It's really easy to find out if said person got a warning...

all you have to do is look at the users warning count before you report and then after...

But that requires effort.

as a user how can you ask Mod's to put in effort if your not willing to put in that little bit

Hush! Do not speak such logical nonsense! Someone might see this. Then where would we be?!

I believe that warning counts are only shown to mods, though I may be mistaken.

Edit: I logged into a multi account of mine, and I am correct, amount of warnings is only visible to Mods.

[MEZZANINE]

@ Roket, Honestly I didnt know you could look up someone elses warning points. Tell me how. Im not sure that would work anyway. Even if I saw his warning points go up one, since their were two reports which one got a warning ? Did either, or did the extra warning point come from something else totally unrelated I know nothing about ?

@ Psyko, a single instance would not prove a pattern. Also consistency would include allowing for previous offenses so if 1 user had a previous verbal warning and the other didnt that could justify harsher punishment so long as all mods use the same punishments in the same circumstances.

@ Mordack, thats a politians response, say you agree with transparency, then say people are too stupid to understand info if they get it. That might be acceptable in democracy where people vote for someone ( hopefully ) smarter than themselves to make the big decisions they dont understand for them, but no-one here was elected. Users unlike voters cant simple vote out a bad mod.

@ Jack, do you really believe mods arent human ? Humans make mistakes, and humans consciously of subconsciously pick sides, favor friends etc. Who watches the watchers ???

[Mordack]

You must forgive me. Politics, after all, is my trade.

[Empy]

@ Roket, Honestly I didnt know you could look up someone elses warning points. Tell me how. Im not sure that would work anyway. Even if I saw his warning points go up one, since their were two reports which one got a warning ? Did either, or did the extra warning point come from something else totally unrelated I know nothing about ?

You can't see others warning points.

@ Jack, do you really believe mods arent human ? Humans make mistakes, and humans consciously of subconsciously pick sides, favor friends etc. Who watches the watchers ???

The Global Mods watch the Section Mods, the Admins watch the Global Mods, Amelia watches the Admins (pretty much - not exactly).

[Mordack]

The admin are watched, in a curious way, but not by Amelia. She, whoever she is, is merely Jason's half arsed response to the griping of Tekki and company. Part of me thinks she won't ever surface again after her hopelessly dull announcement.

Ultimately, the admin are policed by Jason. Someone who tends to listen to whoever's whispering in his ear at the present moment. How do you think one user made the leap from blue to yellow in one fell swoop? Sometimes it's ambitious general mods. Some of them green, if you'll pardon the pun, with envy. There was that time he convinced a new admin team to sack all the existing GMs. I suspected someone else's hand in that, although I'm still not sure whose. His powers-that-be rulings are ultimately arbitrary and illogical. You hate it at first, but then you think 'Well, at least he shakes things up.'

Bit honest for a politician, I know. Most of them save the juicy stuff for their memoirs. Alastair Darling style.

[Psi Kiya Trist]

The admin are watched, in a curious way, but not by Amelia. She, whoever she is, is merely Jason's half arsed response to the griping of Tekki and company. Part of me thinks she won't ever surface again after her hopelessly dull announcement.

Ultimately, the admin are policed by Jason. Someone who tends to listen to whoever's whispering in his ear at the present moment. How do you think one user made the leap from blue to yellow in one fell swoop? Sometimes it's ambitious general mods. Some of them green, if you'll pardon the pun, with envy. There was that time he convinced a new admin team to sack all the existing GMs. I suspected someone else's hand in that, although I'm still not sure whose. His powers-that-be rulings are ultimately arbitrary and illogical. You hate it at first, but then you think 'Well, at least he shakes things up.'

Bit honest for a politician, I know. Most of them save the juicy stuff for their memoirs. Alastair Darling style.

Re: this.