My suggestions (which may offend I'm not sure what I'm writting yet)

1. We need to make the ban list/reason public.
This has been discussed time and time again and the only problem it poses is for underaged users. I would suggest that we include underaged users under the heading of "UNDERAGED/ADVERTISING" since all posts made by both should be removed anyway it would take away a reasonable amount of threat. Underaged members are usually found either by outing themselves in various ways in which case they've already made it known to the board/chat or by using a name they have else where with their true details. If there was enough doubt about a members age for the mods to search user names elsewhere, then there was enough for any "not so nice" members to as well (not that I'm suggesting we have those types of members)

If you were to keep it simple, a drop down box of options for why someone was banned, it also means that its not open to abuse by others (again not suggesting they would) keeping the reasons to the point and not personal.


2. Perm bans shouldn't be used as soon as they are.
People change, grow and such. Currently its set to warning, temp ban (usually a week) perm ban. I'd suggest it be changed to warning, week ban, month ban, 6 month ban, perm ban (possible a year ban between the last 2)

Now no banning system is going to work unless other aspects are changed, after a recent discussion with another mod this became far more apparent. Members who are banned need a way of getting in touch with the mods as a whole, not individuals if they require further information as to why they were banned. If they don't get that, it leaves the mod team open to manipulation. I was told that a mod had banned this member and that they were gloating about it to them over MSN, this same mod was told that I'd told the member they'd banned him. Thankfully both mods in question came to the other and realised this was just an attempt to stir the shit, but it brings to light the problems of not being able to contact the team as a whole. There should also be a formal appeals process, if someone feels they were wrongly banned, or they have reasonable circumstances which lead to the behaviour which got them banned, then there needs to be a process in place for dealing with this, and again it needs to go to ALL mods, not individuals, or your going to get people claiming that so and so was contacted and never said anything and such.

3. Members need to feel more secure that if they report a mod, it'll be taken seriously (not that it isn't, but since no one sees warnings sent and such, they don't know that)
The mods should be trusted, and we all know thats not the case, reporting the mods, to the mods doesn't help with this. I think in cases were people feel a mod has acted in a way they shouldn't, Rob_E should be contacted direct. He and he alone should deal with the complaint and there should be a statement to that effect made public. If nothing else it would give the members a better feeling of trust because they have an official way of calling things to attention should they feel the need.

4. Members of the board should be able to vote on those who apply to be mods. The mods currently vote, thats around 10 people, the members need to feel they've had a part of the process, and need to feel they have the best people looking after things. The argument against this is that it would become a popularity contest, well, ok you have a point, but it is anyway, you think the ten mods are going to vote for people they can't stand?

Hey, make it an added perk of being a gold member maybe? You pay your money, and not all of you use the gallery. Getting to vote on future mods would probably encourage more people to sign up as gold members which would help lower costs a little too.