Infraction Discussion on Content

[anthony]

Ok, this is the one and only chance all members get to have their say on this, as I am really just getting annoyed with new members bullshit comments on some simple things like, READING THE RULES.

I created a username and got an infraction... the typical infraction is for not writing thread titles correctly, accurate, etc. So this is what it looks like as a PM to the member:

You have received a warning at PTSD Forum

Dear anthony_test,

You have received a warning at PTSD Forum.

Reason:
-------
Incorrect Writing of Thread Title


-------

Original Post:
[DLMURL]http://www.ptsdforum.org/post93134.html#post93134[/DLMURL]
Quote:

This is a reply to get an example infraction for discussion.

Warnings serve as a reminder to you of the forum's rules, which you are expected to understand and follow.

All the best,
PTSD Forum

What am I missing here? What is harsh about this exactly?

The only change is the heading and a line of content from a warning to an infraction itself, being warning is replaced by infraction and an infraction contains points and days the infraction has cost you for not following the rules. Warnings are always given first for most things, though not all, such as links, aggressive behaviour and suicidal posting.

What am I missing here please? I just do not see how the above is harsh as a system wide method to implement the rules.

People used to bitch and whinge when they received a PM about the same things... now its just a new thing to bitch and whinge about IMHO... but I am giving all the opportunity to tell me exactly how I could make this any more gentle... and realistically. Rules must be enforced, so how can this be changed to ensure rules are enforced without hurting some people's feelings? Even though it is a persons own problem IMO that they do not read the rules upon registration, even with prompting during registration and the big fat prompt at the top of every page, reminding about the editorial policy and rules to be read and adhered... maybe its just me, not sure.

Have your say now or forever hold your peace! What is so indelicate of the above private message sent to a member not following the rules compared to an editor having to type the same thing our each time?

Added: I have added a poll to this to settle it once and for and find a solution that the majority agree with. I do not typically add polls outside the poll forum, though I believe it is warranted for this issue.

 

[Nicolette]

I'm with Anthony on this one....don't get what the big deal is and why there is so much carry on about it. The infraction or warning comes up exactly the same as a PM which no-one complains about.

I have received PMs which say the infraction makes them feel rejected.....way over the top reaction if you ask me and I'm tired of it. This type of response is often followed by "I'm no longer going to be a member here as I don't feel welcome". I wish these members would get over it and perhaps they should go and work on their self esteem IMHO.

 

[tardis]

Never had one, but it doesn't sound harsh to me. More just to the point, like a reminder.

Oh... and I got a kick out of my girlfriend... she tried to get one on purpose because she was curious hehe. Just goes to show its also a matter of attitude imho.

 

[A-RON]

Hey Anthony, have you ever heard of "Emotionally Intelligent Signage"? You might want to Google it.

By the way, I don't thinks it's harsh in a "normal" environment, but you have to remember that you're dealing with some people that get defensive easily. Neither side is wrong for the way they feel, but I think it might help you achieve your intended purpose if the wording was more emotionally considerate.

Hope this helps.

 

[anthony]

So what is your suggestion Aaron?

 

[Nicolette]

but you have to remember that you're dealing with some people that get defensive easily.

Ummm.... IMHO I don't think I this will change with whatever you write and whether you add warm and fuzzies to it. IMHO the people who react to this are reacting to the warning or infraction and get defensive for doing something "wrong" rather than the content.

 

[A-RON]

Fair enough, Nicolette. I would say you're probably right about "wrong" vs. "content".

Anthony, maybe instead of an "infraction" you could give the person a flaming piece of poop that can only be flung back by clicking a button that acknowledges that the person won't do it again. That way it's funny and puts people at ease, and it even gives them the chance to fling poop at you! It could even be a monkey that flings the poop, and this would be as simple as drawing an illustration kind of like avatars and then enabling this illustration to be a part of the overall design of the infraction. It won't come across as a "serious" direct attack, but you would essentially be giving an infraction and the person would know not to do it again. It might sound childish, but I bet it would work. If not, you could try something similar and/or revise this idea. It's just an idea.

 

[Mina]

I don't think it's too harsh, but it could be more pleasant. If you wanted to "fuzzy" it up a little, you could say something like,

"Please understand that this warning is not intended as a personal attack - we are glad to have so many participating members! However, for the greater good of this community, you are expected to understand and follow the rules of this forum. This warning is a reminder to please abide by these policies, which can be found at <insert link here>."

 

[Luthien]

We're whining??? Riiiiiight.

Anthony,

It isn't about the way the infraction, or warning is written. For me, I just don't see the sense of alienating someone over not capitalizing a thread title, or for grammatical error ect.

The way the warning is written isn't what is harsh. It is that you are nit-picking over something that really shouldn't matter. As I have said before, I understand that some rules such as "no abusive posting", " no spamming", "no adding links" are important, but why should it matter if a thread title isn't capitalized?

My first warning was about a vague thread title (though it wasn't pointed out to me the reason...I had to figure it out myself that vagueness was the issue) I got pretty upset with it. it came as a shock, and just felt bad, however. I understood once I figured out what the issue was.

My second warning was for not capitalizing a thread title. Now I am sorry, but I think this is unnessesary. The thread I didn't capitalize was entitled "Anniversary, alone and flashing back" I was in a bad state while writing it, and whoever had to read through it to approve it had to have been able to see that, but they gave me a warning for it anyway. That is what I find harsh. I was in flashback, I was really not doing well, and then when I came back to see if anyone had any support to offer, the first thing I got was a warning about it. I didn't take it well. I considered giving up on the site. Yes, an overreaction on my part, but you have PTSD too Anthony, you know how we tend to overreact, get defensive, not be able to see things rationally...why can't you see that getting a warning for something so little as not capitalizing (especially when it was glaringly obvious the thread was written while I was under severe stress) would upset me?? Can you see why?

I think that the warning does not need to be changed, but I think what warrants one does.

I do not think that forgetting, or being to upset to adhere to strict rules should result in a warning. You had to have read my thread to have seen the issue (and because I was under moderation at that point). Maybe you could have chosen to let it slide just once? get to see if it was a habit with me?

Also, as I have said before. I have seen one person who never returned because of these infractions..I have also seen a couple others who wrote to being distressed about it.

That is where my true issue lies. not just because I was stressed out because of my own warnings, but because I have seen people leave this site and lose out on the wonderful experience they might have gotten otherwise.

This site has helped me so much in so little time and I thank you for it so much.

I would like to take this point to say that while your warning as it was written wasn't harsh, that you saying our "new member bullshit" and that we're "Bitching and whining" about this, is pretty HARSH. Do you know how you came across in your first post in this thread??

It sounded like "Oh poor me, members are saying I might be doing something wrong...I better raise a thread to see how many poeple I can get to support me and back me up" You sounded whiny...not us.

We raised an issue. A legitamate one. We saw something we didn't agree with so we questioned it, and pretty tactfully,I might add. You responed by swearing and saying we're causing bullshit and are bitching and whining. Why is that Anthony?? Because we disagree with you?

I think you might be letting being the owner and administrator of this site go to your head just a little. Just because we don't agree with you doesn't mean we're whining. Do we not have the right to raise issues as we see them?

I think you should consider A-RON's ideas. They are a humourous and funny way of going about enforcing rules that might not cause the panic and defense that I felt when I got my warnings.

I'm sorry for being so blunt, and for saying it as I see it. But you did ask.

IAs a final statment, I was actually really upset when I saw you say it's "new member bullshit" and that we're "bitching and whining", I was going to light right into you and respond in a similarly immature manner, but I tried to use tact...might be something for you to consider in the future.

Thanks.

 

[Grama-Herc]

Warm and Fuzzy ? ? ? ? PALEEEZE ! ! ! ! Give me a break.

While I don't think we should "get in trouble" for failing to use capital letters in all the right places, rules are necessary.

We are, after all, adults. We may be adults with PTSD, but we are still adults and as adults we know rules need to be followed.

Just simply check what you have written before you post it and if you see a mistake, FIX IT! ! Re read your post immediately and if you see something wrong, EDIT IT ! !

I don't think we need little poops to throw. THAT would insult me. Little cutesy things are not appropriate in this setting, IMHO.

My only suggestion is a possible "warning system" for the 1st infraction??

 

[Nicolette]

Herc, I have to agree with you. We are adults and in all other facets of our daily lives we have rules to abide by. Some we agree with and others we may not. PTSD does not give sufferers a get out of jail card for following the rules.

Mina, what you wrote is very polite and I do agree that it may soften the blow but I still truly believe that no matter how a post was written some members would still upset. I often try to explain in the warnings and infractions what the problem is, how to fix it and link them to the editorial policy. It doesn't happen 100% of the time but I do do it. I still have received nasty reactions to this. What people don't understand is we get attacked and abused by those saying we should be less harsh....quite the pot calling the kettle black.

Luthien, while some people have left the forum due to what you have written....well, isn't that their issue? I mean, we point out they are doing something wrong and their response is "F*$k you, I'm leaving as I don't need to put up with this". Come on....if it was your forum you are free to set the rules as you see fit. Attacking Anthony personally for his decisions only highlights that you take this personally which it really isnt.

If the forum's rules are too strict and harsh Luthien, why are there so many active members who cope without any of the issues you highlight? If you work for a company, they have their guidelines and standards, supermarkets have standards for food and hygiene including how things must be in straight lines on the shelf. I don't think this is about what the rules are....IMHO people with PTSD don't do well with any added stress, some have self esteem issues and others don't react well to being told how to act and that is the underlying issue. Generally, from what I have seen most people who have the issues with the rules here are the ones having a tough time in life in general. While I feel for those people, the rules are pitched to the average of the community.

 

[Luthien]

Nicolette,

I did not "attack Anthony personally" about the rules...I "attacked" him because he was immature in saying that us new members are causing "bullshit" and are "bitching and whining" I am sorry, but it was immature of him to say it that way.

And yes, I am sensitive, I admitted that, I even said I was wrong to have been upset about my first warning...but someone read my post on "Anniverary, alone, and flashing back" and whoever is was certainly wasn't being understanding when they warned me...and the warning was signed, I believe by Anthony, while my first one was signed by you, so how was it an automated response??

Anthony has been through the same thing (PTSD) he should understand that some of us are going to be very upset and sensitive..and he should try to respond in a nice way about it.

Maybe a no bullshit, very direct and unsympathetic, apathetic response was what Anthony recieved while he was getting help for his PTSD, maybe that is what worked for him, but I personally need a little bit of compassion and empathy..something I have never felt I recieved from Anthony. In fact, he sometimes comes across as apathetic and uncaring in his posts. (I know this could be because context is easily lost in type, so I've always let it go unmentioned, but you can't say that he sounded empathetic and caring when he said we're bullshitting, bitching and whining)

I gave my opinion as he asked for, and was not doing it in an abusive way. I only got angry, sounded blunt, and possibly rude when I addressed his immaturity and whining. If you read through the other discussion that started this whole thread of his, you'll see that no one was whining at all, we weren't bitching, we were asking questions and stating concerns.

Anthony clearly got angry about being challenged, and his response was to lash out as us new members...

Sorry if you don't agree with me, but don't you think you could be a tad biased?

Do you see nothing wrong with him calling us bullshit whiners who are bitching?