The current stance is that people are fallible, ergo people get a second chance except when the issue is deemed too serious. I try to ban as few people as possible, because I want to make banishment a statement. I want to tell to the world "See, this jerk is so bad, RincewindTheWiz banned him !". Banning everyone left right and centre like happens on some sites, devaluates banishments and makes them look like a part of normal board life. I can't do anything more severe than a ban (usually
) so I'd like it to have some meaning.
I personally believe more in catching as much as I can, versus the approach of punishing as severely as possible. One look at this board will show that any whiff of warez talk gets sniffed out by our dedicated team of top mods. So why would we have to ban people for the first offense ? Most of them don't know any better. I'd rather have them stay and adapt, and ultimately contribute to the board, than swatting them immediately by the dozens each day. It's a matter of approach. Some of the people who are now the most senior members and best contributors, also made a little error in the past. They adapted and they're still here. That's all I ask from people : stop doing it and get with the program.
If I DO ban someone for repeated board violations, he's free to make another account and try again. If he learned his lesson, he won't get into trouble anymore, if he didn't, he will. It's that simple. Ultimately we can't stop people who are dedicated and skillfull enough to deceive us. But that's not important anyway, let them have their little victory. As long as the board itself is in good health, it doesn't matter anyway.
PS These are my views, some of my fellow mods think differently and may be a little more harsher/more lenient. YMMV