A Suggestion for Modification on Editor Bans
Moderator: Official Reviewer Representatives
- Sam Ibeh
- Previous Member of the Month
- Posts: 1107
- Joined: 19 Jun 2019, 09:46
- Currently Reading:
- Bookshelf Size: 459
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-sam-ibeh.html
- Latest Review: The vampires: Sodom and Gomorrah by Levănt DuPrae
A Suggestion for Modification on Editor Bans
I have a suggestion about the ban on editors from scoring of reviews.
At the moment, when an editor recieves 3 warnings for either beingg rude or for submiting an innacurate scorecord, they are banned from scoring reviews. It is awesome, as it keeps editors on their toes. It also seems like this ban is a permanent ban. Sometimes, the editors do not intentionally mean to offend.
Therefore, I have a suggestion to give room for editors to learn and get a second chance at editing after learning from their mistakes (every repentant offender deserves a second chance).
The suggestion is to give room for reinstatement of a repentant editor after six months of their ban. If they are still level 6 at the expiry of 6 months, they can manually apply to be reinstated as editors per the current system.
Thank you.
Sam.
- Scott
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4105
- Joined: 31 Jul 2006, 23:00
- Currently Reading: The Unbound Soul
- Bookshelf Size: 363
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-scott.html
- Reading Device: B00JG8GOWU
- Publishing Contest Votes: 960
- Signature Addition: View official OnlineBookClub.org review of In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
It's a good suggestion. Thank you for thinking of it.
For me, I wouldn't personally upvote as is. The reason is that I don't think simply having time go by is enough to warrant reinstating someone.
Instead, I think there would need to be other qualifications besides just six months going by, such as doing a minimum number of reviews in that time with a minimum editorial score.
"Non ignara mali miseris succurrere disco." Virgil, The Aeneid
- Sam Ibeh
- Previous Member of the Month
- Posts: 1107
- Joined: 19 Jun 2019, 09:46
- Currently Reading:
- Bookshelf Size: 459
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-sam-ibeh.html
- Latest Review: The vampires: Sodom and Gomorrah by Levănt DuPrae
Hi Scott,Scott wrote: ↑04 Aug 2023, 20:14It's a good suggestion. Thank you for thinking of it.
For me, I wouldn't personally upvote as is. The reason is that I don't think simply having time go by is enough to warrant reinstating someone.
Instead, I think there would need to be other qualifications besides just six months going by, such as doing a minimum number of reviews in that time with a minimum editorial score.
Thank you for adding that. I didn't add I because I assumed that the current system of manual access to level 6 and being an editor already covered that.
Thank you also for considering the suggestion. Do have the best of the day.
Sam.
- Scott
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4105
- Joined: 31 Jul 2006, 23:00
- Currently Reading: The Unbound Soul
- Bookshelf Size: 363
- Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-scott.html
- Reading Device: B00JG8GOWU
- Publishing Contest Votes: 960
- Signature Addition: View official OnlineBookClub.org review of In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
I don't mean PRQ Disputes because sometimes there is a dispute that is ultimately decided by the moderators in the reviewer's favor.
"Non ignara mali miseris succurrere disco." Virgil, The Aeneid