Loading…
17
Tried a zero-tolerance warning system and lost half my active users in a month
Ngl, I thought cracking down hard on rule breakers would clean up my forum. I started issuing instant warnings for any minor infraction, no exceptions. After about 3 weeks, I noticed my daily active users dropped from 200 to around 90. Turns out a bunch of my regulars who just made the occasional dumb joke got scared off. Now I'm trying a three strike system instead. Has anyone else had a harsh policy backfire on them like this?
3 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In3 Comments
quinnbailey3mo ago
Yikes, sounds like you went from zero enforcement straight to maximum overdrive. Maybe the real issue is that people weren't breaking rules on purpose, they just didn't know where the line was because nobody drew it before.
6
rivera.jake3mo ago
Read a piece the other day about how a lot of forum drama comes from people assuming bad intentions when it's really just confusion. Makes me think you're right that most folks didn't know where the line was, you know? If you had a rule against "spam" but never defined what spam looked like, people are just gonna guess. Then when you finally drop the hammer on them, they feel blindsided. A simple sticky post listing examples of what's okay and what's not (like "don't post the same link five times in an hour") could've saved everyone a headache.
2
alice8083mo ago
Honestly I kinda disagree with you here. Your zero tolerance system probably wasn't the real problem - sounds more like you went from nothing to everything overnight without warning people first. Three strikes is fine but you might still lose folks if you don't tell them the rules are changing before you enforce them. Regulars who make dumb jokes usually just need a gentle reminder, not a strike at all. Maybe focus on warning people privately first instead of hitting them with bans right away. That way your active users know you're not out to get them, just trying to keep things clean.
5