Just thought of an idea that's on some other games...if someone's being abusive and needs to be booted...why not just completely mute them from forum and in-game...so they can still play, just not be heard? Opinions?

I suspect I know what game you got that idea from , and it is one i have wondered about before. I think it could work.

Good idea. And once unmuted, if they continue to be disruptive, then boot them.

I like it.

or if someone puts you off in games.

ignore can be used in game, but need something for forum.

plus in say a chat room muting someone would save everyone in the room having to put them on ignore.

I don't think there needs be an ignore feature for the forum.
It could cause confusion on threads.
And also I'd imagine it would be a pain for Nick to integrate.

Suppose, how about once you're muted, you get your posting rights taken away? and then once you've been unmuted you get to apply for them again, but just have like 1 warning and if you carry on being a pain in the...then you get no posting rights at all? hmmmmmmm!

they already have a removal of posting rights in place lol. But the muting idea seems a more short term thing, say for 24 hours or something which would be different to that.

It always confuses me why people want a ignore feature on the forum, A forum is a place to discuss stuff, people will disagree with one another.
And if people get out of hand which is very rare they get there posting rights revoked.

Why not boot them straight away? Everybody knows the rules so why introduce an extra tier of warning?

I like the idea of muting though, if I understand it correctly what you mean (sort of a 'chat rights revoked') and an ignore for a user on the forum might be beneficial (muting is already implemented with posting rights).

I can see how it could be incorporated into the current discipline system so I will ask admins and other mods to read this thread .

Isn't mute exactly the same as ignore?

If only a member of staff can mute a player then this doesnt seem ideal or positive. And like Buddy says why give them an extra life.

The only thing I could imagine mute being useful for is for example, a 24 hour mute punishment for people who have been booted. So once their boot is lifted, they cant speak for a further 24 hours.

I don't understand why you firstly said "why introduce an extra tier of warning?", and then afterwards stated that you thought it was a good idea? Lol...? Unless I've misunderstood you?

Anyway I'm not entirely sure how the moderators boot and what not, (whether or not they have a pop-up window with tools, or whether they have to type commands, etc...), but I've noticed that in order for a moderator to take action, they must be in the room where the incident and culprit is. Moderators can't be everywhere at once, so what I suggest, in addition to other thoughts shared on this thread, is to have a system where moderators can take action from anywhere. So if something happened in the Members Bar, but a moderator was busy in a different room, they could still deal with the situation.

Maybe what I'm trying to say is, give them more moderating abilities.

no because ignore is only a one-to-one thing where player A is ingored by player B. Mute would probably be a staff orientated thing (if it is used like on other websites dom was talking about) which would mean every person wouldnt see pms/chat from that person. This would mean they couldnt annoy one person, then when ignored by that person just move on to someone else.

The way I see it would be for things maybe not severe enough for a boot but still annoying to people. It wouldnt be an extra life I dont think.

The mute as a continuation of a boot (maybe for certain offences) does seem quite a good idea.

Yes, you have. The first paragraph was specifically a comment on your post which implied that they were only booted after having served a muting period and continued being disruptive thereafter.

The second paragraph was about the thread topic on the principle of muting someone in general.

My post was also about muting someone in general. The part about booting was an additional option which would obviously be dependent on the seriousness of the situation.

If you were to mute someone however, the only reason for doing so would be because they're being disruptive. So if they continue to disrupt then booting them would be a good punishment.

Not entirely sure why you picked up on my post as it seems we both have the same views on this?

Two reasons why I picked up on it: firstly because it was the last post on the thread when I was about to comment and secondly, as I have already intimated, was the fact that it appeared you were advocating the mute be used as a warning prior to booting (which you have confirmed in your last post). My position is more on the lines of what Adam is saying in that muting is in addition to booting (which is the first course of action).

Oh right I understand now. However I have to disagree. I think if you're going to boot someone, then that should be that. I don't see why muting should be used as a secondary action. It just doesn't really make much sense. Booting sends out a stronger signal than muting does. I think it would only be beneficial if it was used as a warning.

I've seen it used on many different gaming sites as a way of warning members and it has worked a treat.

I'll put this into an example.
Lets say I was being abusive towards another member.
A moderator could give a "verbal warning" stating that if I continue, I will be muted. If I disregard the moderators warning, then my account will be muted for say 10 minutes. If after that 10 minutes, I still continue to be abusive, then I will be booted for however long the moderator decides is necessary. An efficient 3 step moderating system.

It would be situation dependent though Jack, muting would hardly be appropriate for cheating or very serious written offenses eg racism.

I know but this thread is to discuss muting. Like you said, it wouldn't be appropriate to use for cheating or other serious offenses, so in those situations, a simple boot would suffice.