It is recommended that moderator administrators use the “mute” function with caution
Thread Content
Today I read a post that said, “The chief moderator, please ban Hai Chuan Di Yi Meng Ren immediately.” After seeing the screenshot of that post, I felt that the person who posted that spammy message had a clear goal: to accumulate a large amount of wealth on the forum in a short time, so as to be able to download certain resources from the forum. If such posts are simply banned, it will lead to an increase in the number of useless registered accounts on those forums; once a account is banned, it becomes unusable for a certain period of time. Since it’s useless, those who post spam will register again in order to access the resources offered by the forum, and then continue to post spam and download content. Rather than doing that, we might as well adopt a different approach to management – instead of using words, we can use point deductions. After all, the wealth score is a tool on the forum; by deducting a large number of points, we can punish someone, reducing their score to a negative value. This way, we can see what they have available to download. It’s best not to let their score drop too low (for example, not below -30 in terms of wealth), or else their download privileges will be reduced, leaving them unable to download anything. If the score isn’t reduced too much, it gives them some hope that they might still be able to download something. This is much better than a simple “mute” order
This is also a way to provide support. There’s some truth to it! But those who ignore the forum rules and post illegal content should be banned promptly. :handshake
A mute period is just a reminder, as it has a deadline. Regarding this matter, the scoring criteria have repeatedly reminded everyone to use this feature with caution
Even if points are deducted, isn’t it still possible to register a new number and keep spamming? Points deduction and suspension are merely means...
Points deduction and suspension are not the same thing; when you are suspended, you can’t do anything on the forum at all, while if points are deducted, you can still carry out certain actions. Those who consider the forum to be beneficial for them will naturally start to behave more responsibly. They might even complain about the point deductions or try other ways to make things right, such as admitting their mistakes. Only those few who don’t take the forum seriously will continue to act without concern.
Indeed, if it were a negative score, he probably wouldn’t want to use that account and would instead apply for a new one. This is a solution that only addresses the symptoms rather than the root cause. I remember someone saying on a forum that restricting registrations by allowing only invitations or requiring real-name registration would be a good approach; haha, that sounds fine, but it’s likely to be quite difficult to implement real-name registration in practice
For negative scores, it depends on how negative they are; of course he won’t accept those with very high negative values. Additionally, it’s possible to control access to reading rights as a way to regulate attractiveness, though limited communication is still allowed； The result of being banned is that you can’t do anything on the forum: you can’t post any messages, nor can you delete any existing ones, and you can’t send any messages either. It’s as if you’re cut off from everyone on the forum for a certain period of time (usually at least 7 days; however, the person who is banned may not know this duration and think that their account has been banned). What should they do if they can’t get what they want? They can simply register another account that isn’t important, and continue to post messages for their so-called ‘sacred purpose’. Actually, everyone can put themselves in the other person’s shoes and think about what the consequences of a suspension or point deduction would be
Posting excessively is done to earn points; on one hand, the forum is already planning to eliminate the system of awarding +1 wealth for topic posts. As a result, there will be fewer pointless posts in the future. Moreover, those who do this are actually doing it for financial gain – could there be a rule prohibiting the downloading of such materials? A proper warning can also be given to them. At the same time, they can still participate in discussions. I agree with the original poster’s view: use such features cautiously. It’s advisable to discuss them with other moderators or administrators before using them. After all, the greater the rights, the greater the responsibilities.