Posted by Dr. Bob on July 4, 2007, at 16:35:34
In reply to Re: blocks, options, and prevention, posted by Klavot on July 2, 2007, at 13:54:17
> there are moments when one impulsively does things, and then is taken up short by what one has done.
> If it's a question of giving people a chance to repeat an experience, so as to learn enough from the repetitions that it would actually help change behavior, allowing people to come back and make mistakes and being blocked more often would, for me, make the learning process more probable.
I agree, it can be hard if someone's impulsive or needs many repetitions to learn, but if people can't make mistakes as often, there's less overall incivility and more supportive overall atmosphere.
> What about r = 39.
> It is the smallest r that guarantees that after 6 months, previous incivility will still factor. So even if the previous block was only one week, and that expired 6 months ago, then
> B = S + D*[3^(-P/39)] = S + 1*[3^(-24/39)] = S + 0.51 -> S + 1 week.
Thanks for working on this. Hmm, powers of e probably are about as intuitive than powers of 3, and if we set:
0.5 = exp(-24/r)
r = 24/ln2 ~ 35
Another issue is when a poster is immediately uncivil again. Currently, if it's impersonal and S = 2:
B = S * (D - P/r) = 2 * D
But with your formula and S = 1:
B = S + D * exp(-P/r) = 1 + D
It makes the formula more complicated, but to add the exponential decay and keep the current doubling (exponential growth), it could be:
B = 1 + (SD - 1) * exp(-P/r)
with S = 2 or 3. So if D = 48 and P = 147 and it were impersonal, we would still get:
B = 1 + (2 * 48 - 1) * exp(-147/35) = 2.42 -> 2 weeks
In Zenhussy's case, however, it was personal, not impersonal, so it would've been an extra week:
B = 1 + (3 * 48 - 1) * exp(-147/35) = 3.14 -> 3 weeks