Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-9062114-20141102010736

Something important that I feel hasn't been discussed in a while is blocking and how it should be handled on this Wiki. I personally believe we need a new blocking policy, as the current one doesn't cover a lot of situations, has rules and regulations that don't make sense or are not helpful, and is just downright outdated on this Wiki now. Blocking is a big power for certain users to have, and their should be many checks & balances for them to use it at all. As someone who has been blocked unfairly, I have come up with some ideas on rules that could help the Wiki and limit some of the Admin's power with blocking.


 * First time blocks can NOT exceed one week

Of course some exceptions would need to be made for spammers, and such, but in general for offenders bans should not exceed a certain time. In my opinion should be one week, as a first time offender would usually not need anymore time to calm down or stop their hamrful activity (which is what bans are for, not to "punish" a user, contrary to what some might believe), right now there are only rules for how long Vandalism users can be banned, and that is barely enforced on this Wiki. First time offenders really do not need that long of a ban from the Wiki, that only causes more issue and can just be kind of disrespectful.


 * Talk Pages need to be edited by banned users

One thing about Bans that can be super annoying, is when a user has no way of contacting the Wiki or possibly clearing something up. By not allowing a blocked user to edit talk page, it does just that. Everyone should be able to address criticism, or give their opinions on the block, removing that ability from a user, I think is unfair. If a user however, spams or leaves insults on their page, then it can be locked. But, that should not be the default choice.


 * Users need to be warned

Before a user is be blocked, it's probably logical to warn them that a block might be coming if they keep misbehaving. Since maybe then they would stop, and the core issue with them can be discussed. Just banning after a one time thing, is as I said a little unfair, and kind of makes this Wiki out very strict. Especially if they didn't know what they were doing was wrong in the first place. Warnings wouldn't need to be recent, even an older warning could count, Official warnings should only be able to be given out by Administrators.


 * Progressivly long Blocks

When a user is constantly misbehaving and getting blocked, there should be a system for how to handle it. There is something like this, however it appears to be unenforced by the Administrators, and only applies to Vandals, however the system I purpose would be similar but for every user: First Block 3 day - 1 week, second block, 1 week - 2 weeks, third block, 2 weeks - 1 month, fourth block anything higher than that. So when these situations occur Administrators have a system that they will know how to handle this, instead of just having to randomly choose times for them, which can lead to drama as explained


 * Only official rules can warrent blocks

Users should only have to follow rules made for the Wikia, what I mean by this is an Admin can't go and enforce a rule from another Wiki that they just happen to like it. For example, you can't go to Wikipedia see on of their policies and start enforcing that here because said Sysop just happens to agree with it. They especially should not use their tools to enforce it.


 * Alts should warrant a higher block

What this is supposed to mean is that if a user uses an Alt Account to bypass a block, it should bring it up to the next section, like if a user is banned for a week, a second time ban, and they use an alt to use the Wiki it will get extended to a month and treated, as an extra ban. As, I feel the way we handle alts is poor, we either are too harsh, or not stern enough with it. I don't agree a user should get an indefinite block for using an alt once, however I don't think they should be ignored for it however. I've seen users do stuff like this before and improve once back, so that might be why I kind of feel they should be given more chances for one bad choice they might make


 * The rules should be enforce EQUALLY to everyone

Now I know you might be thinking this is obvious, but you'd be surprised how often this goes on. That Admins will enforce rules only on those they are not friends with, or won't on those who they are closer to, if a user gets blocked for doing something, and another did the same thing and recieved no punishment that should be something the blockee can bring up. This would mean, either both would get a penalty, or niether would. But as a Wiki we cannot allow obvious cronyism to go on, or let the Administrators play favorites.

Now these are just my ideas I don't know if the community completely agrees, completely disagees, or is neutral, or even might like some but not all of it, whatever it is I think we should discuss this.  