Is it truly good to hear that. You’re awesome
That should not be an issue with staff. You are meant to be patient. You are meant to treat each case without bias.
For all those who think that it’s getting worse:
Spoiler
[hr]
Double posts were not included. “non proper” appeals i.e. not using the ban appeal form were not counted. 14-16 Appeals were surveyed for both months. Temp-Banns were not counted in the percentage banned. Conducted in an un-biased fashion. Any questions ask VirBinarus.
EDIT: Putting it in a spoiler, so that people qouting me don’t take up a riddiculus amount of space.
As far as I know there has never been staff bias. Secondly bans can be overturned if staff feel there is any but there never has been.
But thanks for your “suggestion”
I’m curious, where did you get the data?
Oh, you picked 14-16 threads at random from each month. Your chart would imply that it is the total number of bans.
Counter-example: this guy here.
He posted something that wasn’t ban-worthy, was banned for it, and when the appeal came round, there was a staff discussion and it was overruled. If, as staff, any one of us does make a mistake or a questionable decision, it’s always fixed.
As much as I’m open to the idea, how about actually proposing something instead of just saying what you don’t want? Sure, even I agree that a few things could be reworked (see Asmo’s "counter-example post), but for us to really fulfill your needs (not saying for sure we will) you have to apply some constructive criticism.
Oh, and
Thanks. 
wait… how’s Asmo’s post an example of how things need to be reworked?
i can tell you the reason for this and so can the whole staffing team
Then, do tell.
Nothing needs to be changed. So what, 4 people who have done reasonably bannable things have perma-bans. What does it matter that we have been perma-banning more for? I’m not seeing the actual point you are making. If you’re saying 4 perma-bans are too much basically I’m understanding that you want us to set a limit for how many people we do this for. Well I can assure you that would not happen, and at times when we feel like there is more to the player’s ban then we think we have a separate discussion for it. Non-Staff do not know that we actually open Staff discussion in a private forum regarding how we each view the actions of someone with a very strong ban offense and that we all come together to decide the fate of the user’s course of action.
With that said, DO NOT blame this on new staff. That’s hell’a rude and offensive to our newer Staff. Most of our staff members participate in decisions regarding the terms to leave off on some bans so targeting them doesn’t really take anything anywhere as far as rule changes are going. I’m not seeing anywhere about what exactly you want us to do, and by no means do we consider revoking perma-bans to temporary bans for most cases unless there is a very sincere ban appeal where the user understands what he/she has done and convinces us to unban on some terms of agreement. We have very specific rules and the following players you have included in your main post do in fact fall under the radar for a strong reason to unban.
Verna - Continuously made alts to bypass a ban. PERMA BAN
Cortwade - Previous Bans DO add up and the things he mentioned did seriously hurt some other player’s feeling. Ban on top of Ban. How much more chances do we give him? PERMA BAN
Matt - When a Player achieves the rank of Trusted we expect that they are following the rules and are exemplary assets to the community. Not only did he break his trust, but he lied to us when he had the chance to really come clean and take on perhaps a long-term temporary ban. I was for one very disappointed that we had to make this decision but X-Ray has and always will be a permanent ban offense. PERMA BAN
Airstar - This might be the ONLY real case where perhaps a permanent ban was not necessary due to miscommunication but failure to comply with original staff orders. So sure you may attempt to support bringing him back as you wish but do not relate these other permanent bans to Airstar as they are VERY unique to their situations.
[size=16px]
[size=16px]
[size=16px]I’ll have you assured that there have been plenty of more temporary bans given in the past 2-3 years at least compared to previous years. I see someone did a statistic on Perma Bans vs. Regular Ban. But there was no statistic done on that for temporary bans. We carry a lot more temporary bans than you guys probably notice since we do have a system for how long someone should be banned for depending on the courses of their action
With that said, [b]DO NOT[/b] blame this on new staff. That's hell'a rude and offensive to our newer Staff.
I don’t intend to blame the permaban increase of new staff. Some of the new staff members are great and enforce PCB rules really well. I mean to say that the increase in bans of constantly active players could possibly be linked. It isnt a matter of not liking certain staff members it is just psychology. If a person does not like an other and they are then put in to a position of power, the person will subconsciously go against the person they did not like with that power.
[size=16px]
[size=16px]
I agree with this statement. Even if the ban is long (3-9 months) it would still be better than someone being permanently banned. There are of course matters that should be permabanned for, however many others seem somewhat harsh.
[size=16px]I'll have you assured that there have been plenty of more temporary bans given in the past 2-3 years at least compared to previous years. I see someone did a statistic on Perma Bans vs. Regular Ban. But there was no statistic done on that for temporary bans. We carry a lot more temporary bans than you guys probably notice since we do have a system for how long someone should be banned for depending on the courses of their action
In reference to the ban percentages. When I mention an increase in bans I do not mean overall. The ban amount is relatively the same. I meant bans of players who were consistently known and active. Not people who just came to grief.
[details="Spoiler"]Verna - Continuously made alts to bypass a ban. [b][u]PERMA BAN[/u][/b][/details]Cortwade - Previous Bans DO add up and the things he mentioned did seriously hurt some other player’s feeling. Ban on top of Ban. How much more chances do we give him? PERMA BAN
Matt - When a Player achieves the rank of Trusted we expect that they are following the rules and are exemplary assets to the community. Not only did he break his trust, but he lied to us when he had the chance to really come clean and take on perhaps a long-term temporary ban. I was for one very disappointed that we had to make this decision but X-Ray has and always will be a permanent ban offense. PERMA BAN
Airstar - This might be the ONLY real case where perhaps a permanent ban was not necessary due to miscommunication but failure to comply with original staff orders. So sure you may attempt to support bringing him back as you wish but do not relate these other permanent bans to Airstar as they are VERY unique to their situations.
As for the reasons above. Thank you for actually separating each one and giving legitimate reasons rather than just saying “We have reasons”
In regards to Verna, they deserved it. No questions asked. They continuously came back on with their alts and ignored countless warnings against doing so.
For Cortwade, while he did offend someone, many people posted in his appeal that they were “irritated” by him and I am sure that this had an effect on the appeal.
As for Matt, he lied, yes. However, a permaban seems somewhat harsh as before the finding of his mining “methods” a lot of people liked him. Though I am sure there is at least one person that does not like him, I have never seen them.
Lastly, for Airstar, we seem to be in agreement.
Your point was made known, but honestly, there’s no issue with staff and bans. There’s been numerous bans in the past that had loads of people in disagreement (Yomi, Robin, Ninja, Dord, among many others). It happens. You just have to remember that Minecraft is simply a game. When people make the game unpleasant to play, there are consequences. We don’t just ban for no good reason, we’re usually well-thought out in the bans.
There’s no real development in this thread beyond going back and forth between opinions of bans and why some bans should stay in place. Nothing’s going to change about said bans, so let’s just let it be. Remember that we always have the appeal system in place, so even permabans can be negotiated if the player’s offense, as you feel, wasn’t equal to the punishment.
This is my proposal.
If the ban is related to griefing or destruction of someones structures - Allow the person who got griefed to decide the fate of the person who committed the crime. (Within reason)
If the ban is related to bullying/harassment - Have an unbiased party look at the logs to decide what exactly happened. Ban accordingly. Consult the person who was bullied after they have had time to calm down.
In the event of hacking - Demand the ceasing of hacking on first offense. If it happens again, permaban, no questions asked.
All in all, I believe the community should have more say in bans. Staff should have final say, naturally. However, I feel that if the communities opinions are not weighed then surely the community will not be profiting. I would like to add more detail to this, but am currently at lunch.
I will return shortly and either alter this post or make another one.
Anyone and everyone, please modify this idea. It is likely someone has a better idea.
Thanks,
John
I agree with King there. I’ve got some more statistics!
The following shows the percentages of people who showed content with the status quo of bans.
[details=“Spoiler”]
[hr]
People who did not express a clear opinion were not counted. Each user was only counted once.
[/details]
I think they should have more say, and more know.
This is my theory as to why people don’t like the way the newer staff do ban appeals (naming no Ferf/wolfy respectively names)
I apologize in advance for my resurrection of this thread, but I've forum-banned Matt. [b]Staff, you should be able to see the reasons.[/b]But not non-staff.
[b]After further deliberation with staff , we came to the conclusion[/b] that you have been using a hacked client for unfair advantage , it would be incorrect to let this serious rule breaking go unpunished . on that note your ban is going to stay permanent . and please dont even bother appealing again
My theory is that people don’t like the recent carrying out of bans because in some cases, a lot of the reasoning has been left on the
I don’t want to make the reason public to everyone. There’s nothing wrong with that. Staff can leave as much or as little information classified about any ban as we want to, because we are the final word, and we are the authority. The problem with community input in ban appeals is that, un-involved people would get involved, which we don’t need; the appeal could get off topic, which we also don’t need; and bias. Staff remain as unbiased as possible in every situation.
tl;dr, staff should be the only ones involved in ban appeals until we otherwise specify.
The reason for this is that staff are more likely to know details about the ban. We have an entire forum section dedicated to dealing with problematic players. Also dealing with problems people cause can be extremely hard work for the staff, dealing with x-rayers for example is very tedious because the ill-gotten items need to be found and destroyed. Often the fact that the player has wasted time staff could have spent having fun or helping people is a contributory reason.
I think they should have more say, and more know.
In many cases, players do have a say. Often with griefing the affected player is asked if they want the player to be banned, and can give input on the appeal, but we don’t force them to. A lot of the cases stated earlier have no or too many affected people, Cortwade for example.
This is my theory as to why people don't like the way the newer staff do ban appeals (naming no Ferf/wolfy respectively names)I don't want to disclose the reason for this ban, as the person that did it did not wish to, but the reason for this was justified, and to me it makes sense that this wasn't disclosed at the timeI apologize in advance for my resurrection of this thread, but I've forum-banned Matt. [b]Staff, you should be able to see the reasons.[/b]But not non-staff.
[b]After further deliberation with staff , we came to the conclusion[/b] that you have been using a hacked client for unfair advantage , it would be incorrect to let this serious rule breaking go unpunished . on that note your ban is going to stay permanent . and please dont even bother appealing againMy theory is that people don’t like the recent carrying out of bans because in some cases, a lot of the reasoning has been left on the
Things are discussed on the staff board generally for the following reasons:
[ul][li]We want to secretly monitor players who we suspect are rule breaking[/li]
[li]The nature of the ban (eg exploits) should not be disclosed[/li]
[li]There is some sensitive reason (eg the banning of anthjmon10)[/li]
[li]A public vote may be skewed for a variety of reasons[/li][/ul]
In expansion of that last point, a vote accessible to everyone may not be entirely fair. For example, the player may have friends that don’t care what they did and want them back.
Imagine Player X gets banned for something, and a public vote is held.
5 players vote to remain banned, 6 to unban. Whilst that may seem fair, what if two of the ‘unban’ votes only wanted the person unbanned because they were friends and didn’t care about what happened.
This happened with a player I banned (although in messages rather than votes), where friends of the banned player basically ignored everything that happened and wanted the player unbanned purely because they were friends, even though what they did was quite serious.
Ultimately, it’s impossible to have a 100% fair system when we have appointed judges/juries/executioners, but it would be extremely difficult (and not appropirate for a server environment IMO) to do it any other way. Some servers don’t even make ban appeals public, they’re all done secretly behind-the-scenes by staff, and the player has no say other than their initial appeal. I think we’re a lot fairer than that.
[Octo’s post above, removed quote for space]
hit the nail on the head. and as an answer to my previous statement another reason for more bans is the constant re-offenders and arseholery that has been going on. nothing has changed as such its just staff are now more vigilant and act upon problems much quicker
Thinking about this a bit, I’m going to make a teeny disclosure. A while ago a thread was made to track the offences of certain players who had repeatedly done thing too minor for a ban. These people would be banned if they did anything at all. Combined with various alt-hungry players, this has caused a significant increase in rejected appeals and bans overall.
Nice idea, but not a practical one, as it simply takes too much time and effort for a minuscule gain.
If the ban is related to bullying/harassment - Have an unbiased party look at the logs to decide what exactly happened. Ban accordingly. Consult the person who was bullied after they have had time to calm down.This is pretty much what happens already.
In the event of hacking - Demand the ceasing of hacking on first offense. If it happens again, permaban, no questions asked.We often consider an unban on appeal if they confess to the crime and promise to stop using it. In matt's case, he did not confess to using it, when he obviously was, therefore he remained banned.
All in all, I believe the community should have more say in bans. Staff should have final say, naturally. However, I feel that if the communities opinions are not weighed then surely the community will not be profiting. I would like to add more detail to this, but am currently at lunch.Community involvement is cool and all, but if we had to take a public vote on every appeal, nothing would ever get done, and then there's the issue octo pointed out about friends backing each other up.
People liking someone is no excuse to give them a free pass.
Lots of people liked Bill Cosby, but he still committed a crime, and has to face the punishment.