posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 07:25 AM
Members meeting out "punishment" or "branding" on other members would never work, for obvious reasons. It'd be a "civil board war", without a
doubt. Nuff said about that, I think.
If you're suggesting staff "brand" members, I believe that would do more harm than good. Someone who receives a quiet U2U behind the scenes may
well see the error of their ways and alter their behaviour. But brand someone and make a spectacle out of them and you are asking for trouble and
simply setting up an unhappy, negative environment. I think the little red warn flags are enough in this regard. Also, most of your categories are
completely subjective => Define "political bias"..., and at exactly what point is a thread "derailed"?
That being said, I understand your pain to an extent, and I'd say you've been noticing a slight increase in what you perceive as objectionable
activity because of this:
6000 Board Members by Monday
With a recent phenomenal influx of new members, there are a lot of folks around who haven't yet grown accustomed to the way we do things here at ATS.
Be assured that the staff are primarily guiding and helping folks where we can, and secondarily curbing cantankerous behaviour where necessary. Matter
of fact, with 13 shiny new mods grinning like madmen, stumbling around with the T & C in one hand, and new loaded bazookas in the other, some of the
members have wondered what the hell hit them.
So if you're implying that the staff are taking it easy on general trollery, then you're
The best way that we can improve the quality of submissions and debate is by improving the quality of our own, individual
debate, thereby leading by example, and by rewarding in kind those who do the same.
[edit on 2006-3-29 by wecomeinpeace]