[frankant]

i would like to make a valid suggestion here for bbo to mull over... it is time bbo came out with a Zero Tolerance Policy agreement digitally signed by new players after creation of id and before entering the BBO website incorporating certain specific clauses explaining what constitutes disturbing behaviour and for the existing players sometime in immediate future, these players should digitally sign and accept ZTP. you should correctly codify the punitive action for every offence.. the game will win eventually,, let's not wage a war of words..and never can a person less than or equal to an expert comment about how one became an expert in bbo.. for all players the standard procedure of selecting "skill level" should go,, it is only after certain logins and certain points should they be promoted to the other level,,, let us start from novice level itself... value based addition to skill level pls. thanks desi.. i think a system should also be introduced in place immediately...

[TylerE]

Frankly, Zero Tolerance is the worst possible solution to anything. I am not endorsing in any way "bad" behavior, but zero tolerance is a braindead policy that never ends well.

As to the bit about skill levels: Simply, pushaw. You're not the first, and you won't be the last, and I've only seen one common characteristic between those that bring it up, which I will not mention.

PS: Masterpoints != Skill, no matter how much some would like that to be true.

[GreenMan]

 TylerE, on 2013-May-20, 21:10, said:

As to the bit about skill levels: Simply, pushaw. You're not the first, and you won't be the last, and I've only seen one common characteristic between those that bring it up, which I will not mention.

"Posts: 1"?

[Scarabin]

 TylerE, on 2013-May-20, 21:10, said:

Frankly, Zero Tolerance is the worst possible solution to anything. I am not endorsing in any way "bad" behavior, but zero tolerance is a braindead policy that never ends well.

As to the bit about skill levels: Simply, pushaw. You're not the first, and you won't be the last, and I've only seen one common characteristic between those that bring it up, which I will not mention.

PS: Masterpoints != Skill, no matter how much some would like that to be true.

If you offered evidence for your rather sweeping statements I might agree with you. As it stands however I think frankant's suggestion of a zero tolerance policy agreement is entirely reasonable and timely. It might be difficult to implement and would probably result in our more colourful posters being banned.

[mycroft]

Zero Tolerance is insane. Post evidence? Do a quick google on news stories about ZT and schools. Note how ACBL's "zero" tolerance policy works (or doesn't). Actual, explicit instructions on what is considered unacceptable behaviour need to be read and agreed to, with punishments, including banning, if they're violated - I agree (*). But you know, I had a table where everyone was great friends, we were having a great time, the language was *totally* inappropriate, the comments about partner's play, ancestry, and current mates were about what you'd expect. Alcohol might have been involved - kibitzers were (explicitly) not. Should we all have been booted for that? ZT says yes.

(*) Spoiler - er, that already happens. Doesnt stop the GIFs, says the Theory; and it looks like in practise too. <- Penny Arcade, don't go investigating GIFT if you're offended by words that would get one banned by ZT.

[Vampyr]

 mycroft, on 2013-May-30, 09:57, said:

Zero Tolerance is insane. Post evidence? Do a quick google on news stories about ZT and schools.

One of the craziest recent stories was about how a kindergartner or first-grader was suspended because he was eating his Pop-Tart from the outside in -- and at one point the teacher thought that the remainder of the pastry was shaped like a gun!

[Scarabin]

To be fair:

1) This is frankant's first post.

2) I may be naive but zero tolerance seemed to work in New York.

3) Can you judge a policy by the reaction of the fringe?

4) It is reasonable for newcomers to be surprised by the gap between BBO rules and members' actual behaviour.

[Vampyr]

 Scarabin, on 2013-May-30, 16:14, said:

To be fair:

1) This is frankant's first post.

Welcome, frankant.

Quote

2) I may be naive but zero tolerance seemed to work in New York.

Great comparison! I eagerly await the statistics on whether a strict stance on BBOers' loud boomboxes results in fewer members mugging each other.

Quote

3) Can you judge a policy by the reaction of the fringe?

Not sure about this. Probably not, in general. The fringe normally react the same way to everything even if the policy is mildly or moderately in favour of them.

Quote

4) It is reasonable for newcomers to be surprised by the gap between BBO rules and members' actual behaviour.

They should definitely be apprised of the procedure for reporting a post that they feel is offensive. And, naturally, they can block posters whose content they do not like. (This, of course, applies only to the Forums.)

[GreenMan]

 Vampyr, on 2013-May-30, 21:13, said:

Great comparison! I eagerly await the statistics on whether a strict stance on BBOers' loud boomboxes results in fewer members mugging each other.

The 1980s called, they want their stereotypes back.

[Vampyr]

 Scarabin, on 2013-May-30, 16:14, said:

2) I may be naive but zero tolerance seemed to work in New York.

Perhaps you are naive; here is the Wikipedia article.

A book I read a few years ago, Freakonomics, suggested that the reduction in violent crime in the 1990s was a result of Roe v Wade.

[Scarabin]

 Vampyr, on 2013-May-30, 21:46, said:

Perhaps you are naive; here is the Wikipedia article.

A book I read a few years ago, Freakonomics, suggested that the reduction in violent crime in the 1990s was a result of Roe v Wade.

Perhaps the Wikipedia article confuses zero tolerance with mandatory sentencing. I understand zero tolerance as not turning a blind eye to minor crimes - not as applying the same punishment to major and minor crimes. However I do not think describing zero tolerance as brain dead or insane is justified in either case.

As regards my choice of "comparison" I choose those I think will be familiar to most posters. Another "comparison" would be that the Roman Catholic church could benefit from a zero tolerance policy toward sex abuse.

[GreenMan]

Does going from bridge table decorum to big-city crime rates in under 10 posts qualify as a record? Seems pretty swift even for this bunch.

[Vampyr]

 Scarabin, on 2013-May-30, 23:10, said:

I understand zero tolerance as not turning a blind eye to minor crimes

Quite, but there are no "major crimes" that are facilitated by discourtesy at the online bridge table.

In any case, if bad behaviour is reported, something can be done about it. Isn't it supposed to be possible to save the chat logs?

[barmar]

 GreenMan, on 2013-May-31, 01:23, said:

Does going from bridge table decorum to big-city crime rates in under 10 posts qualify as a record? Seems pretty swift even for this bunch.

It would be status quo in the Water Cooler forum. Let's stick to bridge here, please.

Back on topic, Zero Tolerance can be crazy if it's taken to an extreme and interpreted too literally. The main purpose of instituting it was because players were getting away with all kinds of disruptive behavior. Since it's not possible to enumerate precisely how decorum should be maintained, the hyperbolic term "Zero Tolerance" adequately gets the point across that disruption is unacceptable. It's up to the director to use common sense to avoid being excessive in applying it.

[nige1]

Welcome Frankant -- I agree that, like most organisations, BBO should insist that applicants formally agree to explicit conditions before being accepted as members; and sanctions should be enforced against those who flout them.

[Vampyr]

 nige1, on 2013-May-31, 09:43, said:

Welcome Frankant -- I agree that, like most organisations, BBO should insist that applicants formally agree to explicit conditions before being accepted as members; and sanctions should be enforced against those who flout them.

Seriously? Can't civil behaviour be assumed, and penalised without having signed a contract?

[TylerE]

 barmar, on 2013-May-31, 08:18, said:

It would be status quo in the Water Cooler forum. Let's stick to bridge here, please.

Back on topic, Zero Tolerance can be crazy if it's taken to an extreme and interpreted too literally. The main purpose of instituting it was because players were getting away with all kinds of disruptive behavior. Since it's not possible to enumerate precisely how decorum should be maintained, the hyperbolic term "Zero Tolerance" adequately gets the point across that disruption is unacceptable. It's up to the director to use common sense to avoid being excessive in applying it.

But that's exactly the point! if it's "Zero Tolerance" there is no room for judgement.

[GreenMan]

 Vampyr, on 2013-May-31, 10:04, said:

Seriously? Can't civil behaviour be assumed, and penalised without having signed a contract?

Agreeing to Terms of Service is a routine part of signing up for online services. Why not? If nothing else, it shortens the arguments when someone does need to be booted: "You can't make me leave." "You agreed to the ToS and then violated it, so, yes we can."

[mycroft]

oddly enough, that is what BBO does...

which is why I'm flipping out over the "ZT" word, which has all the advantages that "we're really going to take this seriously" does, and all the known disadvantages that "we're really going to take this seriously" doesn't - including in many cases not, in fact, taking it really seriously.

Okay, having the terms of service be a pop-through screen might be better than a link over there, but the only people that seriously believe that people read those pop-through screens are lawyers (and even they don't believe it, they've just written the law such that they can say it with a straight face).

Re: NYC, that's the "broken windows" policy, not a ZT policy in fact, wasn't it? And if we're looking at NYC "crime-fighting", an investigation into the "stop-and-frisk" policy's totally unbiased implementation might be in order. But that's one for the Water Cooler as well.

FrankAnt, welcome, even though I totally disagree with you. Please note that on the Internet, ALL CAPS IS CONSIDERED (and really, truly, read as) SHOUTING. Which may be a factor in the tone of the responses.

[Vampyr]

 mycroft, on 2013-May-31, 11:03, said:

Re: NYC, that's the "broken windows" policy, not a ZT policy in fact, wasn't it?

If I remember correctly the terms were somewhat interchangeable back then -- you avoid the "broken windows" effect by refusing to tolerate sleeping on park benches, petty vandalism etc.

Now, of course, "Zero Tolerance" usually means a policy that is applied uniformly across the board -- eg "no guns or replica guns" treats forming your fingers into a gun and taking a gun to school the same -- with no application of common sense.