New Moderation Policies

[Hileville]

Below are the update moderation policies that will begin to be enforced on 3/27/14.

 

Section One - Board and Administration


"http://forums.thesouthpacific.org/" is the official forum of The South Pacific.


The South Pacific forum is to be administered by its administrators, global moderators, and forum moderators. Any member of the moderation team may issue informal warnings and formal warnings with predefined punishments; however the administration team take further undefined action when necessary following a discussion and vote on the matter.

Section Two - Warnings and Punishment


Each registered member of The South Pacific forums is entitled to a minimum of three formal warnings, subsequent to a prior informal warning. Informal warnings carry no punishment, but once an informal warning has been issued then formal warnings with punishment may be imposed. Informal warnings expire one month after issue, and a further informal warning must be issued before formal warnings can be gained.

 

Upon receipt of their first formal warning a members account will be suspended for 24 hours. Upon receipt of a second formal warning a members account will be suspended for 72 hours. Upon receipt of a third formal warning a members account will be suspended for 168 hours. Further infraction after the third formal warning will lead to the indefinite suspension of a members account, followed by a determination of punishment, up to and including a permanent ban from the forums, by the full administration team.


Members may receive informal and formal warnings for the following activities;

• Spamming: Posting meaningless or irrelevant content in a thread.
  
• Inappropriate Language: Using explicit language extensively and in an inappropriate manner.​
  
• Threadjacking: Discussing something in a serious thread that is irrelevant to the topic at hand.​
  
• Abusive Behavior: Flaming, disrespecting the privacy of another user, and trolling.
  
• Defamation: Issuing false or otherwise unproven statements about an individual or group of individuals.
  

Section Three - Forum Security and Community Protection

 

The admin team may take further extraordinary action against members who threaten the security of the forums or forum community. Members believed to constitute such a threat will have their accounts suspended prior to an admin discussion and vote upon the matter.

 

Members may be deemed such a threat based upon the following activities;

• Posting gore, pornographic content, violent content, and material which violates the federal law of the real-life United States of America.
  
• Promoting activities which are illegal in the real-life United States or are widely illegal internationally.
  
• Posting personal information about another user of the board without their consent, excluding such information needed to identify a nation or account as a specific individual or individuals, ie; IP addresses.
  
• Attempting to hack or otherwise compromise the security of these forums, user accounts, or other internet property in general.
  
• Attempting to circumnavigate forum security by hiding or otherwise masking IP addresses and other means of identification.
  
• ​Threatening to physically harm another user.
  

Section Four - Appeal System

 

Appeals to administrative action will be handled in accordance with Article 4.4 of the South Pacific Charter.

 
Section Five - Alteration

 

These moderation policies may be altered by the administration team at any point in time; such alterations take effect one week after their announcement.

[Hileville]

I should note these will only be put into place if the changes to the Judiciary pass the Assembly.

[Awesomiasa]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">
Section 4 - Administrative Team Appeals

1. Actions taken by the administrative team that involve any of the following may not be appealed to the court:
   <ul class="bbc bbcol decimal"><li>Espionage of the region
   

</li>
</ul> 

• Actions taken by the administrative team that involve any of the following may not be appealed to the court unless the action is argued to be excessive or unjust:
  
  1. <li>Temporary (being defined as under 96 hours) suspension of a member
     
  </li>
  

</blockquote>
Great policy, except that I noticed some inconsistencies with the amendment (relevant parts are as quoted above)

1. The amendment says that espionage is a non-appealable admin ban, however this is not mentioned as a punishable offence in the new moderation policies
   
2. The amendment also says that bans under 96 hours are not allowed to be appealed unless under exceptional circumstances. Does this mean that one can appeal the 168 hour (or 7 day) ban? If so, I wonder how concerns on not being given equal opportunities to contest a ruling on 72 hour bans be addressed?
   

[Hileville]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Rebeltopia" data-cid="120878" data-time="1395079819">
<div>
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">
Section 4 - Administrative Team Appeals

1. Actions taken by the administrative team that involve any of the following may not be appealed to the court:
   <ul class="bbc bbcol decimal"><li>Espionage of the region
   

</li>
</ul> 

• Actions taken by the administrative team that involve any of the following may not be appealed to the court unless the action is argued to be excessive or unjust:
  
  1. <li>Temporary (being defined as under 96 hours) suspension of a member
     
  </li>
  

</blockquote>
Great policy, except that I noticed some inconsistencies with the amendment (relevant parts are as quoted above)

1. The amendment says that espionage is a non-appealable admin ban, however this is not mentioned as a punishable offence in the new moderation policies
   
2. The amendment also says that bans under 96 hours are not allowed to be appealed unless under exceptional circumstances. Does this mean that one can appeal the 168 hour (or 7 day) ban? If so, I wonder how concerns on not being given equal opportunities to contest a ruling on 72 hour bans be addressed?
   

 

</div>
</blockquote>
1.  I will bring this up with the rest of the admins.

2.  This would be appealable to the Court.  The second part of you question would be more of an Assembly matter.  However, the admins may add a way to appeal lesser bans to us directly.  It just isn't something we looked at when discussing these policies.