What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 131 Stack Exchange communities.

Should there be some kind of ♦ mod notification, or even automatic suspension, for users who are repeatedly flagged for spam/offensive content? By flagged I mean flagged the whole six times complete with the -100 penalty.

I have seen at least one user that fits this description. It seems like the -100's (SIX OF THEM) aren't doing the trick, and some other course of action may be necessary.

share|improve this question
1  
Jeff has said that the votes and flags are for the post not the person (though I can't find the reference right now), so while it sounds like a good idea it goes against the ethos of the sites. –  ChrisF Apr 8 '10 at 16:21
    
There was a discussion about his rep drop started by that exact user yesterday here on Meta. –  Pëkka Apr 8 '10 at 16:42
    
I'm confused about how this one got flagged as spam stackoverflow.com/posts/2482562/revisions –  Earlz Apr 8 '10 at 19:30
    
Oh wait. never mind. Those were answers, not questions. And I of course can not seem them because they got deleted and I'm <10k –  Earlz Apr 8 '10 at 19:32
3  
@earlz - the user in question had an answer that was sarcastic and mean spirited. –  user27414 Apr 8 '10 at 19:37
    
@Jon: I'm counting 7 x -100's for that user... –  retracile Apr 9 '10 at 13:58

7 Answers 7

up vote 10 down vote accepted

This is a good idea but auto-suspensions are NOT a good idea. The mods should be alerted and then should decide what to do. They are here for this very reason; let them do their work!

share|improve this answer
2  
+1 Agree with this- I can see an auto-suspend hack attack... trolls going after Jon Skeet... –  Dave Apr 8 '10 at 16:26
1  
In suspension a user has a rep of 1, I'd so have to get a screen shot of Jon Skeet's 1 rep. –  Earlz Apr 8 '10 at 19:31

There should definitely be some penalty for repeatedly being flagged for offensive content. I like your suggestions:

1st) mod warning

2nd) auto suspension

3rd) auto suspension with increasing timespans

share|improve this answer

Since five old posts of that user got flagged as offensive in a single day there is really not that much he could have retroactively changed about that.

Also, if the flags are doing the trick will remain to be seen, since that just happened yesterday.

I don't think any automated action would be appropriate.

share|improve this answer
    
Take a look at his graph. There is far more downward movement than on any other rep graph I've seen, and not just in the last couple of days. –  user27414 Apr 8 '10 at 15:27
    
@Jon: There only seem to be two days with downward movement before the recent series of flags –  sth Apr 8 '10 at 15:56

I'm assuming this kind of behaviour is relatively abnormal. Regardless, I strongly disagree that there should be auto-suspensions.

In the name of transparency and consideration, all of the situations should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis by a moderator (i.e., notify a mod automatically would be nice). Even if the situation is perfectly clear, IMO there needs to be a fair process of trial and appeal before a suspension is given.

Moreover, even if a user's content is flagged a lot, there are varying degrees of offensiveness to the content, past history, etc. While it's unlikely a user would be given a more lenient suspension, it could be decided that a user should be suspended immediately, or for a longer period of time, given the nature of what was posted.

Any kind of auto-suspension system would not be able to evaluate the situation the way a mod could. While that does bring a level of subjectivity to the process, I trust the mods to be fair and take action based on what is best for the site.

share|improve this answer

This user is an interesting case, because he or she actually does provide useful answers in some cases, even sometimes accepted answers. However, it's pretty obvious that other times he or she is being deliberately provocative, and has stated publicly that he or she doesn't particularly care about the offensive penalty.

There is a word for behavior like this that I'll refrain from applying. Let's just say instead that it seems to be attenion-seeking behavior. And creating an entire meta thread about it only encourages such behavior. This is rare enough that moderators can handle it. They're elected because their judgment is trusted by the community, so let's ... well... trust them.

So, just flag for a moderator, don't feed the tr... (cough) ... That is, don't encourage attention-seeking behavior by creating an entire meta discussion around it.

share|improve this answer
1  
I had a different word in mind... –  Robert Harvey Apr 8 '10 at 22:43
    
It's definitely he :) –  РСТȢѸФХѾЦЧШЩЪЫЬѢѤЮѦѪѨѬѠѺѮѰѲѴ Aug 31 '13 at 19:22

If the -100s arent doing the trick, maybe they should be doubled after each offense until X number is reached followed by a suspension.

On a side note, suspensions and -100s are only relevant to existing users with a legitimate amount of rep. Anyone with little to no rep can easily make a new acct.

share|improve this answer

How about, rather than a fixed 100 rep loss, losing a percentage of your rep for repeat offenses. Losing, say, 25% of your rep should be a pretty significant loss for anyone.

I guess it all depends on how much you want to discourage this type of behaviour.

Whatever options are considered, I think that suspension sets a bad precedent. We should be asking people to 'play nice', not 'don't play at all'.

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.