Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,082
Re: Infraction bugs
« Reply #30, on May 12th, 2013, 04:13 PM »
Quote from Arantor on May 12th, 2013, 03:52 PM
Oh, yes, that needs to be handled.
I guess it's related to giving the user ID to parse_bbc beforehand..?
Quote
Why can't we have both? If that looks like what I think it looks like[1] then hell yes. Let's do both!
 1. ...which is shuffling everything except the first and last letters...
Well, no reason not to do both ;)
I'll let you handle it though, don't have time today, I was working on fixing a thought bug (commit coming later), and have run out of coding time... :^^;:

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Infraction bugs
« Reply #31, on May 12th, 2013, 04:16 PM »
Quote
I guess it's related to giving the user ID to parse_bbc beforehand..?
Yup.
Quote
Well, no reason not to do both
I already refactored the disemvowel code to not duplicate all the tag handling between 'disemvowel' and 'scramble' but I'm not entirely happy yet with it.
When we unite against a common enemy that attacks our ethos, it nurtures group solidarity. Trolls are sensational, yes, but we keep everyone honest. | Game Memorial

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,082
Re: Infraction bugs
« Reply #32, on May 13th, 2013, 11:27 AM »
Quote from Nao on May 10th, 2013, 05:36 PM
Quote from Arantor on May 10th, 2013, 05:10 PM
See, in English, sanction is a stronger word than punishment; I changed it to punishment for that reason.
Oh, I see... Well, it's the opposite in French, I'd say... (?)
Bumping this. I feel that we really need to 'fix' the use of the word 'infraction' in the English version, when 'punishment/sanction' is expected.

Any suggestions, from anyone, about a replacement word that wouldn't feel as 'threatening' as Pete fears..?

Drunken Clam

  • Drool, drool, drool....!
  • Posts: 154

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,082
Re: Infraction bugs
« Reply #34, on May 13th, 2013, 01:20 PM »
Ah, yes, that was one of the words used by Pete in the language files, if I'm not mistaken (along with Infraction, Sanction and Warning -- the latter referring, apparently, to the action of 'sending a sanction notification', but I'm not sure at this point, because some strings seem to see it as a synonym to 'infraction'... I told you, I'm lost!)

I'm fine with Penalty, or anything else really, anything that makes Pete happy ;)

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Infraction bugs
« Reply #35, on May 13th, 2013, 03:55 PM »
I'm really not that worried about language changes. Most of this stuff is Just My Opinion (tm) and if others have better suggestions I'm all for changing them.

As long as the language is consistent to users, I don't really mind.

All I'd say is that I started from the premise that a warning is just a warning, a message just to say 'don't do it again', and that infraction is 'don't do it again and because you've been naughty...' whereas sanction... here you only hear it on the news in context of the UN blocking aid/support to countries.

Punishment and penalty are somewhere around infraction on the scale of 'strength of terminology'. But seriously, if people prefer different terms, let's do it.

spoogs

  • Posts: 417
Re: Infraction bugs
« Reply #36, on May 13th, 2013, 05:25 PM »
Ok let me take a stab at this.

User breaks the rules, this is an infraction

Now that the infraction has occurred, what action will be taken?
*Warn the user without further action
*If action is necessary, issue some sort of punishment

So now the matter is what do we call these things?
*I'd say a notice that comes with no punishments should be called a warning.
*If some sort of punishment is necessary issue a citation maybe.
*Along with the citation you can issue punishments or penalties i see these as actions that can be taken such as:
** issue points
** remove signatures
** suspend / temp ban
** ban permanently.....etc

So instead of saying what punishment should occur, say what action should be taken.

I'm quite comfortable with issuing infractions because that's how I knew it to be, but i kinda get the language hiccups as well.
Stick a fork in it SMF

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Infraction bugs
« Reply #37, on August 1st, 2013, 04:59 AM »
There's a lot of good thoughts here but to be honest I actually kind of think we need to see it in action before we really can figure out what the correct terms should be.
Re: Infraction bugs
« Reply #38, on August 23rd, 2013, 09:21 PM »
We've only issued one warning here since we added this system, so I got no idea. Really think we need to see this play out on real systems but I'm getting the sense that renaming it back to Warnings is probably a good idea.