Reformatting Bans? - Opinion and discussion thread

[Chambers]

Hey guys,

Recently there has been a lot of feedback on staff team communication and such and I wanted to throw an idea out there that was kicking around in my head.

 

First.

Currently we have a rule that’s been more or less around since the beginning of the community and that’s the 3 previous offences = a perma ban (No matter the ban reason)

I know prominent community members have voiced concerns on this before ( cough @Sock Monkey ) And I had a couple ideas.

 

First idea that came to mind is simply raising the the amount of PO that can be commited before perma ban is issued (5 was the idea)
Simple and gives more people chances.

The second being a hybrid system.

After you reach 3 PO you are issued a week ban stating that if you commit another two offences you will be perma banned from the community.

Third idea was to simply take the offences themselves into account.

Ex. If someone has 3 bans but each is only minor offences (RDM x1 , etc (6 hour or 1 day ban types)) they will not be issued a perma ban but the regular punishment.

if they committed 3 serious offences (MRDM, racism, harassment, etc) they would receive a perma ban.

Do you like these ideas? Do you have another or want a combination please let us know.

Always looking to improve the staff team and the community as a whole.

 

[Hero]

Options 2/3 are fine with me

[Fallout]

I also agree with 2 and 3

 

[Father Michael]

yea 2 and 3 seem best

[CannonBanned]

Just make it 4 not 5 

[Forseen]

Honestly I never understand the 3 PO rule, and honestly think that a lot of people don’t bother with the effort of an appeal. Some people change but can’t be bothered putting in effort...

 

I feel as though a tiered system would be better, increasing their punishment for each serious offence that occurs and keeping Perma-banning for more severe things such as DDOS threats and stuff. Obviously also taking each offence’s severity into account alongside this.

 

for example, as stated previously, upon reaching 3 serious PO’s then they receive 1 month. At 5 serious PO’s (giving them 2 chances) they’d receive 2 or 3 months, and so on.

Perhaps at 10 or 15 PO’s hand out a Permanent ban with a “appeal here once you’ve had time to reflect” message?

 

This gives the offender chances to change, and a large but not permanent punishment which encourages change rather than removing people immediately.

 

@Carter

Edited July 31, 2019 by Forseen

[Shake]

-1 i think we give them enough chances  

[Foxey]

I like the sound of 2 and 3.

[Sanchez]

All are bad perma on the first offense jk 

Umm the third system i always hated just permaing if they like failrpd and got vanned for it 3 times and also

What would be cool if 

@Carter since ban reasons cant be super long give people a doc or form to fill out everytime they ban listing the ban reason evidence for the ban whitenesses and stuff like that i think that would help this system alot 

[Peace]

The 2nd one looks the best to me

 

[Moros]

The second and third ones seem like good alternatives to me. 

[Arroyo]

I like option 1 and 2. Either are fine to me 

[Alien]

23 minutes ago, Carter said:

 

2 and 3 

[AdamIGN]

12 minutes ago, Shake said:

-1 i think we give them enough chances  

 

[Callsign False]

20 minutes ago, Forseen said:

Honestly I never understand the 3 PO rule, and honestly think that a lot of people don’t bother with the effort of an appeal. Some people change but can’t be bothered putting in effort...

 

I feel as though a tiered system would be better, increasing their punishment for each serious offence that occurs and keeping Perma-banning for more severe things such as DDOS threats and stuff. Obviously also taking each offence’s severity into account alongside this.

 

for example, as stated previously, upon reaching 3 serious PO’s then they receive 1 month. At 5 serious PO’s (giving them 2 chances) they’d receive 2 or 3 months, and so on.

Perhaps at 10 or 15 PO’s hand out a Permanent ban with a “appeal here once you’ve had time to reflect” message?

 

This gives the offender chances to change, and a large but not permanent punishment which encourages change rather than removing people immediately.

I agree with forseen it would make alot more since with a teir system maybe but not sure i have come across alot of minges that just by talking to them and im not even a staff memeber on the server but i have the experiance. But simply talking to them can sometimes even turn them around and they turn put to be good roleplayers and even stay on the server. Alot of this also comes to the fact that if they get on the server just minging no one treats them like people just treats them like another minge. I am guilty of this myself but in the end they get arrested just talk to them alot of the time they will turn for the better. Sometimes irs not the case but it does work.

[Ket]

2 Sounds good. Three sounds okay depending on how each offense is met.

[Craigary]

2

[Bolt]

ideas 2 & 3 are fine, maybe a mix of the two

[zoink]

the 3 PO rule sorry for my language fucking stupid. You should only receive a perma ban if you are harming the community in a severe way

[Soviet98]

I really like the 3rd ideia, also seems more simple to me

[Zensras]

A mix of the second and third system sounds like a good option considering there have been people in the past who will get up like 3 strikes and leave the server for the day and come back the next day to minge again.

 

 

[Trixx]

This is honestly and interesting idea, as someone who believes in giving chances and time for change id agree with the second idea is probably best. We don't want to give people too many chances where they think eh I can just come back.

 

Actions must always have consequences!

[JBFox]

Always thought the 3 bans = perma shit was kinda dumb. Context should always be taken into account when you're going to permanently ban someone. Third idea is what I see as ideal. But eh, what do i know, i'm just some dude who resigned.

[Pot]

2 and 3 seem call +1

[Sock Monkey]

Never thought this would change, glad you guys are trying to be more lenient. the 3rd one is by far the best option, small/petty rule breakings should never amount to a permaban, and should always carry the same max penalty, or lower depending on staff discretion.

 

 

@Forseen s tier idea for more serious offenses could not be better put, that's the standard that should be set. 

(though high staff will have to determine everything considered a minor and large  offense and how long a ban can be for each one so all staff is on the same page) 

 

and for offenses such as ddos, other server advertisements, doxxing, and other things that genuinely cause harm to the server and its players, perma bans can be considered. 

 

 

+1 thank you guys for moving in the right direction with how you go about bans. 

 

 

Also would this exonerate everyone in the past who have perma bans for multiple offenses or other not as severe offenses? @Carter

[Pythin]

Personal opinion @Carter

I the idea of where they can have a max PO like how school do disciplinary points. They received a lot for a major offense they get suspend (2 month ban) or expelled (perma or 8 month ban) . But if they have little issues done, then it should only get to that level if it’s accumulated enough.

i don’t like perma bans because I just think it’s stupid, and only high bans should be acceptable. I also think that the perma ban is acceptable for people who either harm the server (hackers/exploiters) or are just retards(Joey/lily). That’s the only thing I think is acceptable for a perma ban. Any others should just be considered high bans (Ex. 4 month to a year ban) That’s my thought process 

[Washington]

After reading all of the options, I gotta say that hands-down the best would be that 3 choice. Looking at each thing on a case-by-case basis may be more time-consuming (oh wow staff have to do work!?!), however it would ensure that each person is received with a reasonable punishment related to what they did.

It allows for a more fair, just system and would make perma-bans rare, and used in cases in which someone is a viable and likely threat to the community, increasing the severeness of it.

Overall, I'm glad to see this is being discussed and hope to see some very productive change.

For the first time in forever, I might actually be proud of you @Carter

[Chambers]

33 minutes ago, Sock Monkey said:

Never thought this would change, glad you guys are trying to be more lenient. the 3rd one is by far the best option, small/petty rule breakings should never amount to a permaban, and should always carry the same max penalty, or lower depending on staff discretion.

 

 

@Forseen s tier idea for more serious offenses could not be better put, that's the standard that should be set. 

(though high staff will have to determine everything considered a minor and large  offense and how long a ban can be for each one so all staff is on the same page) 

 

and for offenses such as ddos, other server advertisements, doxxing, and other things that genuinely cause harm to the server and its players, perma bans can be considered. 

 

 

+1 thank you guys for moving in the right direction with how you go about bans. 

 

 

Also would this exonerate everyone in the past who have perma bans for multiple offenses or other not as severe offenses? @Carter

When we decide on a final system I would say that anyone that was banned for the PO of over 3 can appeal and more or less get accepted but for those that are already banned for toxicity/harassment, etc would need to contact me to see about an appeal.

[Firewis]

I think the third makes the most sense 

[Billiam Clinton]

9 hours ago, Sock Monkey said:

Never thought this would change, glad you guys are trying to be more lenient. the 3rd one is by far the best option, small/petty rule breakings should never amount to a permaban, and should always carry the same max penalty, or lower depending on staff discretion.

 

 

@Forseen s tier idea for more serious offenses could not be better put, that's the standard that should be set. 

(though high staff will have to determine everything considered a minor and large  offense and how long a ban can be for each one so all staff is on the same page) 

 

and for offenses such as ddos, other server advertisements, doxxing, and other things that genuinely cause harm to the server and its players, perma bans can be considered. 

 

 

+1 thank you guys for moving in the right direction with how you go about bans. 

 

 

Also would this exonerate everyone in the past who have perma bans for multiple offenses or other not as severe offenses? @Carter

 

lmao sounds like this is what you're looking for

 

https://icefuse.net/forums/index.php?threads/icefuse-networks-garrys-mod-punishment-guidelines.23395

[Fizzik]

16 minutes ago, Billiam Clinton said:

 

lmao sounds like this is what you're looking for

 

https://icefuse.net/forums/index.php?threads/icefuse-networks-garrys-mod-punishment-guidelines.23395

Holy carp, Billiam?

[Billiam Clinton]

1 minute ago, Fizzik said:

Holy carp, Billiam?

there isn't a damn holy thing about carps. and yes, that's me. I guess that means you're still around.

[Fizzik]

2 minutes ago, Billiam Clinton said:

there isn't a damn holy thing about carps. and yes, that's me. I guess that means you're still around.

Sorta. Sup man?

[Billiam Clinton]

Just now, Fizzik said:

Sorta. Sup man?

just browsing. recently got my forum account unbanned to see how this place is doin'. looks like you guys are still hanging in there.

[Fizzik]

Just now, Billiam Clinton said:

just browsing. recently got my forum account unbanned to see how this place is doin'. looks like you guys are still hanging in there.

How'd you manage that? Just time?

[Billiam Clinton]

4 minutes ago, Fizzik said:

How'd you manage that? Just time?

nah, some of the circumstances surrounding my ban/removal ages ago were put to rest. joah and I had a small talk.

[Fizzik]

Just now, Billiam Clinton said:

nah, some of the circumstances surrounding my ban/removal ages ago were put to rest. joah and I had a small talk.

That's cool! You coming back?

[Chambers]

Sorry for the late response (My ole' noggin is not doing to great rn)  but I will be discussing the options and feedback from this tread with the Managment, Directors, and HA's and make a final decision on what we are going to do with bans moving forward.

Thank you for the feedback you have provided.