Main Content

Acceptable User Policy / vexatious interacter

Archive - Originally posted on "The Horse's Mouth" - 2013-02-24 16:05:46 - Graham Ellis

When interacting with of via a web site, you'll usually find an AUP (Acceptable User Policy) which you're expected to agree to - it's probably just a click of a button, and most of you probably won't read the details. But it will include things like "no swear words", "no copyright breaches", "no incitement to break the law" And it's very likely to include "no pyramid selling", "post only in English" and "no advertising off topic".

I run forums, and I represent myself through other media which can be generally read too, and these AUP rules are good ones to get right from the start. Open Source Forum software comes with a boiler plate agreement / set of terms - we use Simple Machines for the railway forum. We've taken that boiler plate, added a bit about cookies (which is not to limit users, but rather to inform them), and we have also added the following:

"This agreement extends to personal communication with other members (via personal message, email, or in any other way) where such communication is not acceptable to the recipient." This extends the juristiction and standard rules from public posts (where users may not swear, personally attack each other, etc) to personal messages, to cater for the occasion that (a) upsets (b) and so (b) starts fighting back with (a). They can do it by email if they like, but not as club / forum member to club / forum member.

"You also agree to NEVER use another person's account for any reason, and not to register for a second account if you already have one, even if you are unable to access it for any reason." I don't like users hiding their online status, nor changing their user name - but having two accounts is going too far. People have tried in the past to circumvent a ban this way, and I've seen it use on other forums to do some very neat entrapment of another innocent user.

But ... consider something else ...

Activies which - while they're not against specific rules - generate an inordiante amount of work for the moderators / admins. Often done intentionally to be a bl**dy nuisance.

We've had a handful - no more - of these people over the years. People who waste a huge amount of time by questioning and appealing every decision, who ask questions to which they already know the answers, who ... simply set out to waste as much time (and make as much worry) for the moderators and administrators as they can. There are none of these at the moment, but they came to mind because I was asked to look at another forum's setup and comment, and because I found something that covered this topic on the BBC's policy for moderating comments on their web site. It's covered [here] under freedom of information too - people who look to delay things by repeatedly complaining or filing FOI requests.

A "vexatious interacter" is one who posts / acts in such as way as to increase the workload and stress on the web site operator, and the web site team supporting that operator. The site operation and support team (including owner, programmers, administrators and moderators) will declare that a member or other party is a vexatious interacter in exceptional circumstances, and the team's decision as to what's exceptional will be final. Any sanctions which the team feels appropriate to safeguard the site and its aims, or to reduce the support work overhead that such a vexatious interacter may generate, may be taken without the application of our standard rules, methods, courtesies or policies. Vexatious interacters who wish to make a formal approach to the web site owners may do so in a letter sent via the Royal Mail, postage prepaid, to the address at which the domain is registered, and will be answered if appropriate within four weeks of the receipt of the letter.