[Fujee]

I am not happy with the mod warriors

[scoobs]

This whole issue of provocations is not a one way street.

Yes, he was targeted for provocation by some posters at times but was not above postings that provoked others - in content and in frequency and in his style of posting.

[Mark Lenders]

Clay Death wasn't perfect, but he always striked me as nice guy, and someone who really wanted to talk tennis here. Also, someone who didn't spread hate on any players.

He also PMed once inviting me to his Chat Thread. I didn't post in that thread, but I checked it out and I must say the Castle is brilliant, almost an oasis from the GM tard wars. If Clay Death is indeed responsible for the existence of such a place on MTF, to me it's further proof that he shouldn't be banned.

As shown here, people like him and acknowledge his contributions. Is he perfect? No. Was he an excellent addition to the forum? Most definitely.

[The Bulldog]

Originally Posted by Action Jackson

Of course CD was perfect and never had issues, bans or infractions.

Haha, that's not what I implied, and you know it!

[Allez]

Originally Posted by masterclass

No, "the punishment should fit the crime" logic should be held to here. If he violates a minor offense, give him the appropriate penalty for that. Repeated offenses for that minor offense should result in elevated penalties, but never to a level for a more serious offense. For example, violation escalation should be warning, infraction, 1 week ban, 2 weeks, etc. up to an appropriate maximum - say 1 month. Continued violations should then result in that maximum penalty repeatedly applied.
Respectfully,
masterclass

This is a brilliant idea. Instead of dishing out permabans like some robot (i.e. oops limit of minor infractions reached = permaban), why not go with this very mature way regulating behaviour on the forum ? I think the rules and the process by which these are applied right across the board need to be reviewed. Please give Masterclass' suggestion some serious consideration.

One of CD's many contributions...the Castle, is an amazing place where fans of all players get along. There loads of Federer & Nadal fans there chatting away peacefully. The same cannot be said for GM. Completely different atmosphere. Of course this does not mean CD is exempt from the rules...but if it is true that mods do some deliberations before handing out a permaban, I would hope everything about the poster in question is taken into account.

Cheers scoobs for the update.

[finishingmove]

I think the mods should generally try to help the GM folk understand that tard wars are not really the way to go. If you're spending a lot of time on the forum and read GM exclusively, you will go MAD. That's a fact. Why not engage in some friendly off-topic discussion in one of the plenty chat threads? Or the game threads...

[out_here_grindin]

Originally Posted by Sophocles

As for Clay Death, it simply is not true that he was rude & aggressive only when provoked. He was frequently rude & aggressive with people who innocently imagined they got on well with him, just because he disagreed with them. I don't see how anybody who has read tripwires's 1st post in this thread can see the guy as anything other than an unpleasant bullying creep. On top of that, he spammed the forum remorselessly with tedious repetitive shit & without exception, stood up for every egregious Rafatroll no matter how idiotic their comments while himself pretending not to be a tard. Whether that means he should be permanently banned I don't know, but the argument that you shouldn't be permanently banned for persistent minor offences doesn't stack up. This is essentially a club, not a society with a legal system, and clubs are under no obligation whatever to tolerate the presence of people who make it a less pleasant place for others. I would also question whether bullying other posters is a minor matter.

I don't agree with this fully. Clay Death was not mean to people only because they disagreed with him. I saw on several occasions that he had civil discussions with people who disagreed with him about tennis. He was mean to those he had in his enemy group (which I found the majorty of those posters good) Like Orka N, forsome reason he hated him and he is a very nice guy. Others like the magician where obvious dingbats.

[HKz]

Originally Posted by Kiedis

When I asked you the reason you insulted me yesterday you answered that the only reason was because you simply find my post illogical. After this Clay Death call you Infectus, you whine as always to mods and he was permabanned. Pretty sad and childish chain of events.

So you believe if you not agree with my arguments you are entitled to insult me... this is just fundamentalism, mate.

LOL. You have to utterly be blind. So Clay Fail has never randomly responded to a post/thread of mine with his usuaul "heys mods throw this thread/post away" or whatever he says? Are you seriously that naive? The mods must delete his comments more quickly than you can read..

And yes, I PM all the mods and whine to them about Clay Fail. Him getting permabanned was entirely my doing, you are exactly right (notice my sarcasm) holy crap man, see this is why I struggle to talk to you, your sense makes no sense. Please show me this "whining to mods" comments you see me make. If anything, he was the one to write comments in thread asking mods to do stuff for him, what irony.

[Mr. Oracle]

It's socially just to have various degrees of leniency for the mentally ill. Unban this man.

[Johnny Groove]

I'm pretty sure the only times CD was mean was when he posted here drunk.

He perhaps needs AA more than anything.

[Kiedis]

Originally Posted by HKz

LOL. You have to utterly be blind. So Clay Fail has never randomly responded to a post/thread of mine with his usuaul "heys mods throw this thread/post away" or whatever he says? Are you seriously that naive? The mods must delete his comments more quickly than you can read..

And yes, I PM all the mods and whine to them about Clay Fail. Him getting permabanned was entirely my doing, you are exactly right (notice my sarcasm) holy crap man, see this is why I struggle to talk to you, your sense makes no sense. Please show me this "whining to mods" comments you see me make. If anything, he was the one to write comments in thread asking mods to do stuff for him, what irony.

CD always said he usually got a ban after answering some of your provocations. Maybe it's a coincidence. And to show little appreciation for a particular thread/post is perfectly admissible while you don't be disrespectful with the person who made it. A pair of examples:

"I think Kiedis is one of the most stupid posters of MTF" -> inadmissible <-|-> "I think this post is BS" -> it's rude but admissible.

"Too bad they can't replace your brain.." -> inadmissible <-|-> "IMO you fail for this and that reason" -> enriching attitude

[masterclass]

Originally Posted by scoobs

Just to let you know this thread isn't being ignored - I have read all the contributions and they will be discussed with the other mods. One of us will come back to you in due course with an update.

Scoobs, sorry for the delay in responding. I was out most of the day. Thanks for taking the time to consider this issue. In my mind this issue is not only about Clay Death. His issue just happened to be the catalyst for me.

I've continued thinking about this and I have a proposal for a change in the rules that I believe would make things a bit more fair for all.

Currently from your Site-Wide Rules and Guide to Rule-Breaking Consequences thread, penalties for infractions appear to work like this (please correct me if I'm wrong).:

Offense                        Expires                        Maximum
  
 Discriminatory remarks         Never                          3
 Wishing injury                 Never                          3
 Wishing death                  Never                          2
 Uttering threats               Never                          2
 Multiple accounts              Never                          2
 Harassment                     Never                          3
 Violation of privacy           Never                          3
 Bashing Moderators             1 Year                         7
 Spam (advertising)             -                              -
 Porn/Inappropriate images      1 year                         5
 Signature rule violation       1 year                         7
 Editing a mod's changes        1 year                         5
 Posting for banned member      1 year                         5
 Personal attack                1 year                         10
 Inappropriate language         1 year                         10
 Forum disruptions              1 year                         10
 Baiting                        1 year                         10
 Trolling                       1 year                         10
 Doping Allegations             1 year                         10
 Match Fixing Allegations       1 year                         10

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Offense                        1st red        2nd red        
 
Discriminatory remarks         1 month        2 months
Wishing injury                 1 month        2 months
Wishing death                  3 months       4 months
Uttering threats               1 month        2 months
Multiple accounts              3 months       4 months
Harassment                     3 weeks        1 month
Violation of privacy           1 month        2 months
Moderator bashing              10 days        2 weeks
Spam                           Permanent      -
Porn/Inappropriate images      10 days        2 weeks
Signature rule violation       4 days         5 days
Editing a mod's changes        1 week         2 weeks
Posting for banned member      1 week         2 weeks
Personal attack                -              5 days
Inappropriate language         -              5 days
Forum disruptions              -              1 day
Baiting                        -              1 day
Trolling                       -              1 day
Doping Allegetions             -              1 day
Match Fixing Allegations       -              1 day

As one can see each infraction appears to have a maximum limit of occurrences before one will be presumably eligible to be permanently banned for the infraction. Also there is this statement that appears in addition to the list:

Note that anyone with 15 or more infractions, or anyone who has been banned for more than 1 year (combined) for previous infractions, is automatically a candidate for a permanent ban upon their next infraction

This statement is a bit unclear to me. If infractions have "expired" over time, are they still counted for this purpose, or does this mean 15 or years worth of "current" infractions? I would hope expired are not being counted for this purpose. If not, then I don't see much benefit in expiration. In any event, I don't think this rule is necessary with my proposal below.

Ok, so here is what I suggest as you might have guessed from my previous posts:

1. I think every offense should have a warning given for a first time violation. One can't expect every user to have read and/or understood the rules in total, or after a time, some may forget. I would tend to be lenient with a first time offender. Give a warning and and an opportunity to discuss if the violation is not clear to the user.

2. After a warning, a person should receive an infraction if committing the same offense. The infraction should come with a penalty appropriate to the infraction. It seems pretty clear to me which offenses are considered more serious already.

3. The main change I propose is instead of keeping a pure continuing count of infractions, to state a graduated penalty scale based on the number of infractions to a maximum penalty time. To keep things simple every offense gets x (eg. 5) slots in the scale + more. The time given for each successive incident depends on the severity of the offense. This could be programmed easily by giving a severity factor in time to each offense. Then if it is later decided that the offense should be more severe, then one could just change the severity factor and the penalty times would automatically be recalculated. The time could double for each graduation until the 5th slot is reached. Thereafter the same time penalty is used. The numbers used below are only an example.

For example:

   Offense                  Severity    Expires                       1st   2nd   3rd  4th  5th  more

 Wishing death                 6m       Never                         6m     1y    2y  4y   8y  (8y or P)
 Uttering threats              6m       Never                         6m     1y    2y  4y   8y  (8y or P)
 Multiple accounts             6m       Never                         3m     6m    1y  2y   4y  (4y or P)
 Wishing injury                3m       Never                         3m     6m    1y  2y   4y  (4y or P)
 Discriminatory remarks        6w       Never                         6w     3m    6m  1y   2y  (2y or P)
 Harassment                    6w       Never                         6w     3m    6m  1y   2y  (2y or P)
 Violation of privacy          6w       Never                         6w     3m    6m  1y   2y  (2y or P)
 Bashing Moderators            1w       1 Year                        1w     2w    1m  2m   4m  4m 
 Porn/Inappropriate images     1w       1 year                        1w     2w    1m  2m   4m  4m
 Editing a mod's changes       1w       1 year                        1w     2w    1m  2m   4m  4m
 Posting for banned member     1w       1 year                        1w     2w    1m  2m   4m  4m      
 Signature rule violation      3.5d     1 year                        3.5d   1w    2w  1m   2m  2m
 Personal attack               3.5d     1 year                        3.5d   1w    2w  1m   2m  2m
 Inappropriate language        3.5d     1 year                        3.5d   1w    2w  1m   2m  2m
 Forum disruptions             3.5d     1 year                        3.5d   1w    2w  1m   2m  2m
 Baiting                       3.5d     1 year                        3.5d   1w    2w  1m   2m  2m
 Trolling                      3.5d     1 year                        3.5d   1w    2w  1m   2m  2m
 Doping Allegations            3.5d     1 year                        3.5d   1w    2w  1m   2m  2m
 Match Fixing Allegations      3.5d     1 year                        3.5d   1w    2w  1m   2m  2m
 Spam (advertising)             -        -                             -

For the more column, for the more severe infractions notice I put the max time OR P(ermanent).
Personally, I don't know if permanent is really needed. as the time factor would be pretty long.

Another note is regarding the expiration. I would want to reward good behavior better somehow.
Maybe we could make the expiration factor of 2 on the penalty time, so if one received a 1st time 3 month ban for a specific offense, and then came back and did not commit the same offense for 6 months in this case, then I think the 3 months should be erased and one starts at 0. If your ban was 1 year, you have to be "clean" for 2 years before you go back to 0.

Finally, I think there should be more of a reward system for being a good poster in addition to the punishment system for being a "bad" apple. Rewards appear to work better than punishment in maintaining good behavior. Maybe reward someone with 10,000 vcash credits each month they've been clear of violations? I don't know, maybe others have other suggestions on rewards...

Thanks again for taking the time to review this.

Respectfully,
masterclass

[HKz]

Originally Posted by Kiedis

CD always said he usually got a ban after answering some of your provocations. Maybe it's a coincidence. And to show little appreciation for a particular thread/post is perfectly admissible while you don't be disrespectful with the person who made it. A pair of examples:

"I think Kiedis is one of the most stupid posters of MTF" -> inadmissible <-|-> "I think this post is BS" -> it's rude but admissible.

"Too bad they can't replace your brain.." -> inadmissible <-|-> "IMO you fail for this and that reason" -> enriching attitude

Again, how naive are you? Yes, all the mods are my buddies, obviously I ask them to ban him every time he responds to me (again sense the sarcasm). Tripwires just posted shes gotten harassed by him, Sunset has gotten harassed as well, among others, can you really use some sense here? It was a culmination of many things. If the mods are clearly so ban-frenzy, there would be plenty of more bannings. I've been a mod at several other respectable albeit non-tennis forums, and I can tell you that bans are always going to bring out issues like this thread. You ban people complain, you don't ban people complain. Never a "just right" amount anywhere. Just like anything in life, there are always two sides to everything, this is no different.

You know, I don't have a clean history, you act like Clay Fail is one of the few who got warnings, etc. I've gotten several warnings throughout the years. Clearly he accumulated much more issues, simple as that.

[Kat_YYZ]

Originally Posted by masterclass

.... Another note is regarding the expiration. I would want to reward good behavior better somehow.
Maybe we could make the expiration factor of 2 on the penalty time, so if one received a 1st time 3 month ban for a specific offense, and then came back and did not commit the same offense for 6 months in this case, then I think the 3 months should be erased and one starts at 0. If your ban was 1 year, you have to be "clean" for 2 years before you go back to 0.

Finally, I think there should be more of a reward system for being a good poster in addition to the punishment system for being a "bad" apple. Rewards appear to work better than punishment in maintaining good behavior. Maybe reward someone with 10,000 vcash credits each month they've been clear of violations? I don't know, maybe others have other suggestions on rewards...

Thanks again for taking the time to review this.

Respectfully,
masterclass

mmmm... no.
Not in favour of rewarding people for following the rules. I'd sure love that in real life, though; the government can drop $10,000 in my bank account every year that I don't shoplift... $100,000 every year that I don't murder someone. Good times.

Should only the ones with 'criminal records' get the goodies? Some of us have never had a warning or infraction. Or should we commit some violations first, so we can be praised for 'being good' later?

Violations are pretty clear (at least, as subjectively judged by the mods/administrators with respect to the posted forum rules). Who's a good poster? Unfortunately, trying to determine that would lead to nothing more than your garden-variety popularity contest -- based on friendships and fanbase allegiances.

[Kiedis]

Originally Posted by HKz

Again, how naive are you? Yes, all the mods are my buddies, obviously I ask them to ban him every time he responds to me (again sense the sarcasm). Tripwires just posted shes gotten harassed by him, Sunset has gotten harassed as well, among others, can you really use some sense here? It was a culmination of many things. If the mods are clearly so ban-frenzy, there would be plenty of more bannings. I've been a mod at several other respectable albeit non-tennis forums, and I can tell you that bans are always going to bring out issues like this thread. You ban people complain, you don't ban people complain. Never a "just right" amount anywhere. Just like anything in life, there are always two sides to everything, this is no different.

You know, I don't have a clean history, you act like Clay Fail is one of the few who got warnings, etc. I've gotten several warnings throughout the years. Clearly he accumulated much more issues, simple as that.

I readed the pots where CD allegedly harrased Sunset_of_age... and I agreed with him.

Nadal announces a injury which left him out of Olympics and what is the majority reaction here?

"Get well soon, champion?" Of course don't.

It was greatest display of lack of sportsmanship, unclassy behaviour, vileness and hatred I never seen before in a forum.

Hundreds of posters, a vast majority, saying thinks like "he is faking it", "he fears doping test", "good for the game", "the best news ever" and more and more.

While all of this BS was being said Sunset_of_age and other allegedly unbiased MTF members were silent, not a single reproach, but when a pair of posters writed that Fedtars were being unclassy she, swift and fast, pointed out us angrily that this was unfair with all Federer fans ... Come on, it's like if a little guy is being bullied by three bigger thugs for years while you keep silent and when finally he defends himself you say him that violence is bad and he should be ashamed. Perhaps the phrase is true, but as CD said, on the context she writed it is pretty close to hypocrisy.