Infraction or Ban = No staff position?

If an user that has previous gotten an ban for something or maybe even just an infraction has he/she lost all possibility to become an staff member or do he/she still have an shot?

 

Nah, even our presidents can cheat, get DUIs, and snort coke. It really depends on the severity of things. Like if somebody accidentally posts adult material and forgot to tag it, but it hasn't been fixed by the time I see it, that's an infraction. I'm not going to hold a slip-up over their head for the rest of their forum existence or anything.

 

Depends on what it is. IF it was just a bad mouth and then they turned it aroud and became very good and I needed a staff member than I might.

 

"Second chances" - they are things of beauty.

Issuing a ban and/or an infraction to a prospective staff team member will not have an effect on his/her ability to achieve such a position. Sure - it's going to come up upon reviewing the member, but it's not going to take them out of the running.

 

Psh, hell no! I've been banned MANY times on Pisoga for having a loud mouth and I am Admin, ironic, no?

Bans don't deem the person you are nor should matter to some extent when choosing staff. Though when that person is still getting banned up-till the date you need mods, you should take in consideration such thing, since they might abuse, but if it has happened some time ago and the person has changed in your eyes, it might not be as crucial.

 

Aren't users given infractions to help teach them what they did wrong so they don't do it again? If the user learned from his infraction/mistake, then I don't think it should be counted against him. None of us are perfect members and I'm sure we've all made a mistake somewhere, but if we learn from them, then we become better forum members.

 

You said it, Lynne - learning from our mistakes is crucial, and seeing as none of us are perfect, it's important to be wrong or cause "trouble" every now and then.

 

It depends on the offense. If they had been trolling or disruptive I might think any recent good behavior was an act. For a minor offense I wouldn't worry about it, everyone makes mistakes.

 

What if this member originally shows an extreme dislike towards the community and its members and, because of it, constantly flames other individuals on a daily basis due to differences in opinion?

I can see myself crossing him/her off of the list.

 

Yeah, no way in hell they'd be getting a moderator position. But that kind of behavior is a pretty obvious disqualifier, whereas past indiscretions might be overlooked.

 

Indeed, and those members would more than likely not be on the "possible candidates" list to begin with.

 

Members that receive infractions are treated no different then other members on my sites.

 

For me it depends on the seriousness of their ban, like warranted it - but if it is someone who continuously gets banned i do forget about them as admins.

I only have one other admin at the moment and that is someone who has been donating $50 to my site since well before it opened, she has been there from day dot posting articles, talking points, and been there for me to keep my calm after recent hackings.

 

If someone got an infraction for posting a "dodgy" link or a "bad" word for instance then maybe they just didn't read the rules properly, if they then behaved and I needed another team member I would consider them.

If I were to ban someone then absolutely no way would they ever make it onto my staff team because it takes a lot for me to ever ban anyone, they would have had to have been pretty bad to get the ban in the first place.

 

I think there are no absolutes ... time can make a lot of difference in some people. The thing I would consider is whether a behavior that got them in trouble before is still there, but under wraps, and if more responsibility might bring it out.

 

I wouldn't automatically disqualify somebody just because they received an infraction in the past. It would cause me to think harder, but it isn't an eliminating factor.

Each situation is different, and the varying circumstances are what it all depends on.

 

I very much agree with this. Giving the power to harrass people to someone who's already shown an affinity for that behavior is not a good idea, imo. I agree that such people can put on an act, but their behavior may just be under wraps until they feel they have more power to get away with it.

I also agree the minor infractions by someone who does truly understand better doesn't automatically rule them out. In some cases they may have credibility with more difficult members ... "I used to do that too, but I realized ... " If a forum wants to tolerate lively discussion and strong opinions this could be useful.

 

If I see that someone has changed for the better and has realized how they've done wrong before, I'll happily offer them the chance of being a staff member later on. If someone breaks a rule while a staff member, it's unlikely they'll regain that status again.

It really comes down to how the individual cases are and if they are deserving, and with their general attitude towards the forums.

 

We don't give bans unless its serious or unless a number of serious infractions are reached. So if one gets banned, then likely there is something seriously wrong.

Newbie mistakes and light & old offences are irrelevant. Other than that, staff needs to be an example to the community.

 

Some people that have been banned could serve as examples to the community on how to "grow up" so-to-speak.