LES Update: New ban/suspension system (Karma triggered)

AnthonySmith

Following the Das abo KYC thread https://lowendspirit.com/discussion/11340/das-abo-kyc a lot of discussion was had around the negative karma being able to ban someone, and many people had many opinions on it and safety concerns, which were all good and valid.

Thanks to @davide for the leaky bucket idea, which this is based on.

I have updated the system now, and here is how it works as of today.

If you reach minus 50 karma, you are banned for 10 days (suspended). These votes must be spread between a minimum of 20 accounts for this to trigger.

@mikho and I both get a system PM when this happens, with a summary of who downvoted and where and when, so we can see very quickly that there are no shinanagans.

After 10 days, the account is set back to 0 karma and unsuspended.

If the same account gets to negative 50 karma again within 1 year, it is again suspended for 10 days, same PM, same reset to 0.

If the account then gets to negative 50 again, for a 3rd time, they are banned without any reset, and admins get a PM to validate the ban.

Admins will strip any privileged tags as appropriate after each suspension.

The issue of old accounts with high karma being protected is also taken care of; this negative 50 is within 30 days regardless of the existing karma score, so if you had 2500 and you drop to 2450 within 30 days due to 20 users downvoting your jibberjabber, you still get suspended; you do not have a buffer.

I hope that works for everyone. We will see how it works in practice and tweak accordingly, and as a reminder: this is not Reddit, so the previously drawn comparisons won't really apply here, the point is to make this place more community-driven in terms of accountability.

ascicode

A whole year is a bit long. Wonder how long it would go, if admins ban a user before any negative votes are given.

AnthonySmith

@ascicode said:
A whole year is a bit long. Wonder how long it would go, if admins ban a user before any negative votes are given.

If admins ban a user that is final; they don't get unsuspended.

I am happy to take opinions on the 1-year thing; it was arbitrary but seemed acceptable for someone to get their act together.

yoursunny

@AnthonySmith said:
The issue of old accounts with high karma being protected is also taken care of; this negative 50 is within 30 days regardless of the existing karma score, so if you had 2500 and you drop to 2450 within 30 days due to 20 users downvoting your jibberjabber, you still get suspended; you do not have a buffer.

😭
We should have bought the last flan.

yoursunny

@AnthonySmith said:
if you had 2500 and you drop to 2450 within 30 days due to 20 users downvoting your jibberjabber, you still get suspended;

After 10 days, the account is set back to 0 karma and unsuspended.

Very harsh.

Jab

Just to make sure.
Admins are whitelisted (wait, allowlisted) there so we won't ban admins by accident because they posted something not liked like "We sold to CC".

Right?

IAmNix

@AnthonySmith said: The issue of old accounts with high karma being protected is also taken care of; this negative 50 is within 30 days regardless of the existing karma score, so if you had 2500 and you drop to 2450 within 30 days due to 20 users downvoting your jibberjabber, you still get suspended; you do not have a buffer.

Thank you, this is a load-bearing piece of this feature. Harsh is right, old trolls should not retain their privileges if this is to be anything except a social filter on newcomers.

FrankZ

WSS

@AnthonySmith said: 2500 and you drop to 2450 within 30 days due to 20 users downvoting your jibberjabber, you still get suspended; you do not have a buffer.

This math doesn't math. So if you have 20 downvotes from 2500 how do you end up with 2450?

Jab

@WSS said: This math doesn't math. So if you have 20 downvotes from 2500 how do you end up with 2450?

50 downvotes from 20 unique users so you can't just get downvoted/temp banned by one guy clicking downvote on every post you ever created....

WSS

@Jab said:

@WSS said: This math doesn't math. So if you have 20 downvotes from 2500 how do you end up with 2450?

50 downvotes from 20 unique users so you can't just get downvoted/temp banned by one guy clicking downvote on every post you ever created....

If we had 20 unique users who felt the need to downvote 50 times, you know it'd all be one guy.

HostingNAP

Everyone, please vote if you find anything useful or interesting. Don’t leave the forum without leaving a reaction!

AnthonySmith

@WSS said:

@Jab said:

@WSS said: This math doesn't math. So if you have 20 downvotes from 2500 how do you end up with 2450?

50 downvotes from 20 unique users so you can't just get downvoted/temp banned by one guy clicking downvote on every post you ever created....

If we had 20 unique users who felt the need to downvote 50 times, you know it'd all be one guy.

The 50 total downvotes over the 30 day period must come from at least 20 unique users.

dbadude

How you get karma in the first place?

AnthonySmith

Thanks/upvotes

poei

Which user is the first casualty? Can we get some futures odds?

bikegremlin

It is ironic how contemporary use of the term "karma" is practically a complete opposite of its true meaning (in Budhist and in Hindu philosophies).

AnthonySmith

@poei said:
Which user is the first casualty? Can we get some futures odds?

To be honest, we don't really have the numbers yet for this to be very likely to happen through natural selection unless it really, really should happen, like someone just constantly spamming or offending people for sport, etc, its more of a safeguard if things speed up a bit here so the admins/mods lives are not made hell with a page of flagged posts and reports etc.

The numbers have increased a fair bit over the past 90 days, and new members are fairly frequent now. Aside from all the annoying shit I do here changing stuff, I have also been doing a lot of optimisation and SERP/SEO work for LES and the next phase of that is about to start now that I have a small budget for it I have already started to reach out to some hosts and service providers in connection with this.

In my experience, it usually takes around 3 months to see any benefit from the manual effort made, and there are really no shortcuts.

I am giving it another 3 - 6 months. This place is showing signs of life again, but it needs to show more growth, if that doesn't happen, I will probably be handing on the crown again and letting someone else try something different, but early signs are good.

AnthonySmith

@bikegremlin said: It is ironic how contemporary use of the term "karma"

guilty

poei

@AnthonySmith said:

@bikegremlin said: It is ironic how contemporary use of the term "karma"

guilty

Could roll out Social Creds. Creds being short form of Credits. Kids love this kinda stuff these days. Edgy.

bikegremlin

@poei said:

@AnthonySmith said:

@bikegremlin said: It is ironic how contemporary use of the term "karma"

guilty

Could roll out Social Creds. Creds being short form of Credits. Kids love this kinda stuff these days. Edgy.

We could call it Potassium (K).

Temporary ban due to downvotes could be "acute hipokalemia"?

Downvotes coult be "inferior potassium".

yoursunny

Can each user get a widget that shows how many downvotes they received from how many unique users in past 30 days?
This allows a user to assess how far they are from the suspension hammer.

Can each user get a webpage that shows which posts are recently downvoted?
It’s impractical to track the downvote counters of thousands of old posts.

Symmetrically, there could be a webpage that shows which posts are recently upvoted.
This allows the user to write more posts like that to attract more upvotes.

mikho

@Jab said:
Just to make sure.
Admins are whitelisted (wait, allowlisted) there so we won't ban admins by accident because they posted something not liked like "We sold to CC".

Right?

If that ever happens, I'm sure there will be an "unfortunate accident" happening

AnthonySmith

@mikho said:

@Jab said:
Just to make sure.
Admins are whitelisted (wait, allowlisted) there so we won't ban admins by accident because they posted something not liked like "We sold to CC".

Right?

If that ever happens, I'm sure there will be an "unfortunate accident" happening

Speak for yourself; I am wide open for billoh bucks!

mikho

@AnthonySmith said:

@mikho said:

@Jab said:
Just to make sure.
Admins are whitelisted (wait, allowlisted) there so we won't ban admins by accident because they posted something not liked like "We sold to CC".

Right?

If that ever happens, I'm sure there will be an "unfortunate accident" happening

Speak for yourself; I am wide open for billoh bucks!

Put me in your will and I'll let you know who will be in an accident

bikegremlin

@mikho said:

@AnthonySmith said:

@mikho said:

@Jab said:
Just to make sure.
Admins are whitelisted (wait, allowlisted) there so we won't ban admins by accident because they posted something not liked like "We sold to CC".

Right?

If that ever happens, I'm sure there will be an "unfortunate accident" happening

Speak for yourself; I am wide open for billoh bucks!

Put me in your will and I'll let you know who will be in an accident

If you're in need of a brake service with a... khm... "lifetime warranty", I'll give you a good price!

treesmokah

@AnthonySmith said: the point is to make this place more community-driven in terms of accountability

Ahh democracy

I'm sure it will go well /s

I guess nothing will change my views on this, not a fan. This forum isn't anywhere the size where such measures would be required, one mod checking in once a day is more than enough.

AnthonySmith

@treesmokah said:

@AnthonySmith said: the point is to make this place more community-driven in terms of accountability

Ahh democracy

I'm sure it will go well /s

I guess nothing will change my views on this, not a fan. This forum isn't anywhere the size where such measures would be required, one mod checking in once a day is more than enough.

Agreed 100% but I am working on the assumption and goal of all increasing the numbers and building on a solid foundation.

The first 30 days of stats I gathered here showed around 300k page views give it take, fast forward 90 days and that's closer to 700k and new membership sign up rate is up significantly.

So I would rather be proactive than reactive, we have all seen what happens in democracy when the leaders wait for a problem to become a problem before addressing it (or ignoring it as long as possible)

jcn50

@AnthonySmith said: If the account then gets to negative 50 again, for a 3rd time, they are banned without any reset, and admins get a PM to validate the ban.

I thought I could get @VirCrap banned until I have read this rule so for me I don't think the rules are strict. Meh, also got the red message: You can downvote the same member at most 10 times in 24 hours already

AnthonySmith

@jcn50 said:

@AnthonySmith said: If the account then gets to negative 50 again, for a 3rd time, they are banned without any reset, and admins get a PM to validate the ban.

I thought I could get @VirCrap banned until I have read this rule so for me I don't think the rules are strict. Meh, also got the red message: You can downvote the same member at most 10 times in 24 hours already

It has to be from 20 unique users to be banned.

Why are you trying to get someone banned? The safety nets had to be put in place because of exactly this sort of childish behaviour.

jcn50

@AnthonySmith said: It has to be from 20 unique users to be banned.

Yes, but that condition isn't a limit I can't reach (I think).

@AnthonySmith said: Why are you trying to get someone banned? The safety nets had to be put in place because of exactly this sort of childish behaviour.

My reasons don't matter, you made the rules, then let the users play~! ⚽ ⚾ 🥎 🏀 🏐 🏈 🏉 🎾 🥏 🎳 🏏 🏑 🏒 🥍 🏓 🏸 🥊 🥋 🥅 ⛳ ⛸️ 🎣 🤿 🎽 🎿 🛷 🥌 🎯
And we all know rules can be changed/tweaked along anyway (if I can contribute).

AnthonySmith

I guess my answer doesn't matter either then.

jcn50

@AnthonySmith said: I guess my answer doesn't matter either then.

It does, but I guess it all boils down to the confidence in the/your rules~.

AnthonySmith

@jcn50 said:

@AnthonySmith said: I guess my answer doesn't matter either then.

It does, but I guess it all boils down to the confidence in the/your rules~.

You went out of your way to downvote someone enough times to get them banned, someone who no longer has a provider tag essentially at your request and that has not logged in for months.

This breaks at handful of rules, I am perfectly confident in them, I am just tired of dealing with 'personalities' I think I have reached the 'oh for fucks sake' age where I just don't really want to deal with it anymore, I have better things to do.

So you do your thing, I will just give a small head shake and go and take my dog for a walk.

jcn50

@AnthonySmith said: This breaks at handful of rules, I am perfectly confident in them, I am just tired of dealing with 'personalities' I think I have reached the 'oh for fucks sake' age where I just don't really want to deal with it anymore, I have better things to do.
So you do your thing, I will just give a small head shake and go and take my dog for a walk.

OK OK I will stop ruining your mood (not my intent) and will behave~~~. Sorry Anthony.

You can always make a new rule: "each post in this forum needs to be polite, constructive, and joyful", and I will abide by it myself from now on.

AnthonySmith

I made a good decision

lapua

apparently, i missed the discussion about whether this kind of approach is necessary... so is it really necessary to implement this?

AnthonySmith

@lapua said:
apparently, i missed the discussion about whether this kind of approach is necessary... so is it really necessary to implement this?

A bit late either way now it's in.

ba796

It is a novel idea to have an opportunity to correct a fault and not be immediately "crushed" by it permanently. I made a post on a site and though it was meant to be positive and I did disclose at the beginning of it, got my myself a permanent ban. Also giving a 2nd pass is novel. I like it.