What's new

Infraction Voting

YB85

Banned
Contributor
From the "Why was crittercam banned" thread in General Discussion:

It was a dupe account...honestly, it's the one time I argued for a dupe account (though by then the vote was taken). I loved crittercam.

Why does it take only three votes for an infraction to be given? Shouldn't it be up to a majority? There are eight mods/admins so the vote could be 5-3 against an infraction but the user would still get an infraction. That's a pretty messed up voting system, especially when there is a person or two who I suspect would vote whichever way Jason votes.
 
Actually I just reviewed what happened and I remembered it a bit wrong (surprise surprise!). What happens with dupe accounts is that they just get banned immediately, though a PM is sent to the original poster and they're asked who they want to keep. Jason dealt with it and banned the dupe, and in this case I said something to the effect of "damn, I get banning dupe accounts and all but crittercam was one of my favorites."
 
Why does it take only three votes for an infraction to be given? Shouldn't it be up to a majority?

Not all mods can visit jazzfanz every day, so three is a working majority for all intensive purposes.

It also only take three votes for a report to be ignored.
 
I have a question for mods about duplicate accounts.

I think it' been pretty obvious that some people are using them to juice their rep. power.

It seems to me, that anyone getting caught with a dupe, should have their rep bumped down to a neg. Make them run in the red for a while.
 
I have a question for mods about duplicate accounts.

I think it' been pretty obvious that some people are using them to juice their rep. power.

It seems to me, that anyone getting caught with a dupe, should have their rep bumped down to a neg. Make them run in the red for a while.

given the context, I read this as anyone caught with dope should have their rep bumped down...


bummer
 
Top