Staredit Network

I know this has been made numerous times before, but is there no way to reduce the warn level?

Why not 10% a month? Those with 0% warn can get a bonus for good behavior.

I still have a 20% warn from May 2004. That seems like a while ago...

wow since may? yeah i think some people's warns need to go down a bit.

i agree it should go down but i think it should be weekly base....

I dont think there is cause I got warned by chuiu-os february 2003 for accidentally spamming and now all of the sudden I'm getting pop-ups about my warn level being high from that (20%) saying that it hapenned this year and that i joined sen this year....ive been here for about 2½ years now

I got a 20% warn for "asking for minerals" (I don't remeber the incident), in May...

Think of warn levels as a police record. Let's say you stab somebody and get punished for attempted murder. They won't give you 4 years before they delete it off the records. It will stay on there for the rest of your life. Here on SEN it should be simular and not simular. Simular being when somebody does something such as excessive flaming, it should be on there forever. But if something like mild flaming, or just doing a small 'crime,' should only be warned for about 4 months.

It should depend on what they do. I actually have a little idea. Moose or IP could set up a warning level system:


Or something simular (My days could be off...)

Oh, and about paying for good behavior? I think that's a bad idea. Do you get paid for being good in everyday life? No. It's an expectation. What do you get in reward for behaving good? The priviledge to live there, or what SEN, the priviledge to post and visit the site.

We shouldn't have to 'bribe' members to be good. They SHOULD be good or they will, well, die .

Thats so stupid...
This isn't prison Merrell. People make mistakes every once in a while. If it's constantly I understand that. But if they've been here for a very long while and haven't done anything wrong for "#" of months they will have their warn levels decreased.

Read the guidelines of signatures before putting one in.

• Your ENTIRE signature must remain UNDER a width of 600 pixels and a height of 200 pixels. The Administrators are checking!
• When you click "update my signature", be sure to check the signature preview! It has rulers to show you how large your signature currently is. If the signature stretches beyond the rulers, change it RIGHT AWAY.
• Images with external hosts MUST be under 100kb.

Basically, I scroll past it quickly. If it lags, I check the size.

It doesn't matter if your warn goes down, just don't do it again.

Like I said, over a year, a person can change. Jesus Christ, have some forgivness, man.

If they've changed, they shouldn't get warned again, so the 20% or 40% they have won't catch up to them. Also, if they do hit 100% and the offenses are really old, they'll get a MUCH LESS severe punishment, then say, a member a couple of days old (banning/huge suspension).

What if you get 100% for constantly having a large avatar?

Youd prolly just get a minor suspension?

I think he means that if a person puts an avatar up which is too large, he gets warned for it. He does it again, gets 2 warns, 3 more times and he has 100%, which means he gets suspended. He would probably get banned though for not listening to a moderator.

Flaming is not listening to a moderator either, so no, they'd be the same sentence.

100% sentencing is done on a case by case basis. There is no defined "sentencing".

I quite like Merrell's idea [snapback]353202[/snapback].

However, I think that either warn level should wear off after a while, or if not, be reducable, so that it's possible to give recognition (personal recognition, not public) to anyone who's learnt better of their ways and improved their behaviour.

Would it be too much trouble for mods to be prompted to review members' warn levels say, every three months? It could be spread out over different mods (or allocated to the mods that gave the warnings), and members staggered over the three months to ease the load, and you'd only have to look at those members with positive warn level.

I remember that Yoshi was going to reset the warn levels for some people. He said he was going to do it for me but never did.

We should just keep it simple and not have them go down at all. If you have an 80% for two years, then turn into the most positive member on the site, then screw up somehow and get 100% for something really small (like flaming Jesus, or something) I doubt they'll suspend you for a week.

The warn levels do in fact go down, but only when you hit 100%.

Warn levels mean nothing unless you repeatedly break the rules. Getting warned for a Sig/Avatar violation probably wouldn't be viewed as harshly as a "you tried to hack into the site so you could give yourself privelages" situation.