Board Thread:Wiki Running/@comment-25344936-20160102163719/@comment-26235098-20160103034123

EFFECTIVENESS: My biggest concern is that many users are either unaware or don't understand the warning point system. Those that are aware of it may not understand the severity level of the number of points assigned to them. We do issue warnings when we give points, but sometimes it seems these are not read. In any event, we could also simply explain the problem directly in the warning, without using points.

An advantage of using points is consistency. If we use them though, the users must have much better visibility of the system. Perhaps the welcome message could include a prominent link to it, and even examples of common transgressions? Anons are a big issue here too: is there a good way to ensure an IP user sees a message? Any event we can use there to generate a popup or ... anything???

USABILITY: Another big issue I have is that i find this system cumbersome and I think it is for users too. IMHO, both the "offenses" and penalties must be simplified/generalized, to justify keeping this kind of system, both for our sakes trying to implement, and for the users to understand and remember.

Moreover, the system is not clear how points are accrued after second and third block. My thought is points should be accrued only towards a first block. After that, I feel we should go directly to repeat blocking, and for increased durations. If a person remains block-free for one year, say, they could go back to the points.

Finally, remember, a short block is still a warning of sorts. It's not a permablock! After a brief warning block expires, the user is welcome to come and show they have "improved".

~ cat