Recently in B&M some issues were brought up (You can read the thread http://www.totse.com/community/showthread.php?t=2067183]here ) Some of them I didn't know and so I thought I'd bring it up here.

First of all, when you infract someone, they get an email - we know that. But what I didn't know is that that email does not say what Mod gave the infraction. And if that infraction triggers a ban, they can't access their UserCP either and so can't see who gave the infraction that way.

We have been telling people that if they have an issue about an infraction - or anything really - to first email the Mod in question. If they can't tell who the Mod was, they can't very well email them.

So I am going to start to put my name in all infractions in the user note section so that they know. And I would strongly suggest others do too. I would say something about locking threads too, so that people know who to ask about reopening it.

Granted in forums like SG it can be a little more work to post in every thread you close, but that should be part of the job of Modding SG [Yeah, I know, I didn't always do that myself. But since I've been spending even more time in B&M - and some in the forum previously known as SB - and see people's point in Mods who don't leave a closing note.

But that's really another issue for another time. My focus here is infractions.

The other issue brought up in that thread was that a user felt he had been double infracted by two Mods for the same violation. I looked into it and was unable to confirm or deny the charge. This is because both infractions were profile infractions. And as we know, profile infractions don't indicate what the infraction was for.

I know that we have kinda used profile infractions to infract someone in a forum we don't moderate. Again, this is an issue for another time and place.

But my feelings on profile infractions is that if you're going to give one, you should either link to the thread that had the violation or give the title or something. This way other Mods - and Admins - can see what it was for and so not to infract a person for the same thing twice.

If - and I say if - this person was double infracted, I am going to assume it was by mistake and that the second Mod to infract did not know the person had been infracted for it already. Of course it could be for two totally different things. So again, naming the thread or what ever will avoid such errors or such questions of error from occurring in the future.

Because if the person was infracted for the same thing twice - and the Mod[s] knew it, well I don't have to check with Zok or Acid [though I did] to know that this is wrong. That no person should ever be infracted for the same thing twice.

Where does it say that only one mod may infract a poster?

Probably it was error, sorry.

But, where does it say that only one mod may infract a poster?

One iinfraction per violation should be common sense. More than one may infract a poster, but not for the same infraction.

I'm surprised that this is even in question.

This thread makes me uncomfy.

I know you didnt mean it like this but it's going to be assumed that this is another "yoyobek fucks up once again!" type thread, which it is.

Gah..:(


Anyway, if someone breaks a clearly defined totse rule, I'm going to infract them for it. I'm not going to dick around and dither and worry about if someone else might want to infract them, I'm just going to infract them.

In this situation it was an error on my part. But as I think I said in my email to you, one of them? I cant reverse the fuckers infraction because it's allready expired. So I dont know why he's bitching and whining like such a little cunt so much,

This thread makes me uncomfy.

I know you didn't mean it like this but it's going to be assumed that this is another "yoyobek fucks up once again!" type thread, which it is.

No, it wasn't meant as an attack on you Yoyo, and the talk in IRC hasn't been about you, but about the issue itself. You were just the unfortunate one who had the example that raised the issues, dig?

In the first place, this issue has never been issued so no matter what it's not like you broke a rule. I'm bringing it up so that we can openly discuss it and find if it needs to be a rule

Anyway, if someone breaks a clearly defined totse rule, I'm going to infract them for it. I'm not going to dick around and dither and worry about if someone else might want to infract them, I'm just going to infract them.

That's fine. But if when you go to infract, if you see someone else has already infracted him, then don't give another.

That said, I realize that in the example in question, Jack also made a profile infraction. So I'm assuming that you didn't know it was for the same thing. And this is why I bring up the issues with using profile infractions that I have.

In this situation it was an error on my part. But as I think I said in my email to you, one of them? I cant reverse the fuckers infraction because it's allready expired. So I dont know why he's bitching and whining like such a little cunt so much,


.I think he's bringing up now because he couldn't see his UserCP - and thus the infractions - until he was unbanned and so didn't know until then. And he brings it up now because he still thinks it was unfair - as it turned out to be [though apparently not done intentionally, which I was glad to hear]. I think he was right to bring it up. Otherwise we would have never had these issues come up for discussion and they really need to be.

Now we know to sign infractions so people know who gave it to them. Now we know to identify the thread or action that caused the infraction [when giving a profile infraction].

As I understood things a mod shouldn't infract twice for the same offence.

As for the forum mods infracting someone after a 'foreign' mod has profile infracted someone, I always took that as a judgement call.

A quick look at enter's profile tells me all I need to know. He's the last person who should be bitching.

Infact didn't i see an infraction from you there too, meta?

The guy used to be quite a good poster (at least on S&A) but just recently he's become a right pratt.

As to your other point, I too will be doing likewise and making sure any infractions I give are clearly explained and bear my name and email.

Ok, well flat out: Jack is wrong. multiple infractions for the same infraction is not allowed.

I had thought better of you.

I had thought better of you.

Well I certainly could have said that better. I'm sorry. This has been quite a busy day with a lot of things going on and I didn't put as much thought into all I've been saying as much as I usually do.

I didn't mean to imply that you were doing this Jack, or had indeed even advocated it. I have no problem with the way you Mod at all. Sorry if I gave any other impression.

I make mistakes, I'm still a newbie mod. I hadnt realised that ketch had allready infracted that shitty excuse for a poster.Sorry.


Maybe it's common sense to you guys, but if there's no specific,written rule saying a mod shouldnt infract a poster who's allready been infracted by another mod, then.. I dont see how it's a huge deal.
Is this written anywhere, out of curiousity?
A guide with such valuable bits of information would be lovely if it exists.

..Or am I meant to just automatically know this stuff?