as much as i agree im not sure you can compare Matt to Bill Cosby
I agree, Especially with the “I believe the community should have more say in bans.” Cuase without us there would be no need for staff. How can the server be a “Community” without, the people forming the community? We deserve to be heard. I’m really happy that @TheKingOfSweden has spoken up, most of non staff memebers including myself have always kept quite due to the fact of being told otherwise or be instantly rejected. That is all I have to say 
We get that members want to be more represented in the banning process. Both myself and other staff have said that you are involved and that any more would be a hassle to the process. When ideas “silenced” it’s not because we need to get back to our evil dictatorship ways, it’s because there are problems with them.
If you can come up with a way to fix the problems staff has raised, we’d like to hear it.
I actually really like that idea, I feel as if they greifed my build, I should be able to “press charges” in a way, and have staff (similar to the jury/judge) do the rest.
excactly, but cut me out because you all know what i will probs do lol
[size=14pt]Revised proposal for bans on PCB.
[size=12pt]Main proposal:
I suggest that when someone is banned, an anonymous poll goes up asking for what people think should be done for that scenario (If someone griefs 1,500 blocks, have a poll asking what people should do in that event, (without mentioning the player at hand) as this would prevent friends backing friends as mentioned before. This would also get what the community feels should be done. At that point, go through with the appeal process.
I also think that previous offenses should not count if they are not related. For example, Cortwade was on thin ice because of his griefing ban. Since his current ban fell in to a different category, he should have had more breathing room. Whereas if someone has a history of griefing, and they yet again griefed, their punishment would be more severe.
As for the monitoring of players in secret, if it has to be done, it has to be done. However, this can easily be abused. What I mean by this is, if a staff who is very good friends with someone else witnesses them break a rule, they will likely stay silent as to not harm the friendship (Friends don’t like being spied on by other friends) while if a staff does not like someone then they will be more likely the ban that person for more minor infractions.
Also, I think the length of banning could be somewhat modified. Rather than permanently ban someone from PCB, give them a long ban period, in which they can appeal once more (and only once) and then give them a period back on the server where they are subject to monitoring. If they are caught again, then a permaban is in order. This will heavily discourage people from repeating their offenses if they wish to remain players on PCB.
I also think is a ban in incorrectly made then the staff rather than the player at hand should be reprimanded. This is fair and would prevent staff from jumping the gun, when that happens (Such as when VirBinarus was banned)
[size=14pt]Specifics:
Section I.
Griefing related bans.
I believe that these bans should have their severity decide their length. For example, if someone destroys 50 blocks there ban could be only 48 hours. If they destroy/effect 5,000 blocks, the ban could be considerably longer.
Additional to this Jmvvana proposed that the person who was griefer should have the ultimate say in the fate of the person who did the griefing. Since it was their work that was destroyed. I agree with this wholeheartedly.
Section II.
Harrassment bans
Anyone who criticizes someone on race, religion, sexual orientation, gender, looks, or rank on the server should be warned to stop. If they do not, they should be banned (and made to appeal)
I believe what is bannable in the case of harassment should be very specific. This would prevent opinion based bans. Such as the ban VirBinarus had to deal with, over a simple statement.
Everyone, please do criticize and alter this as you feel is necessary. Compromise is key.
Honestly, I get that you’re “trying to help”, but our ban system is fine as-is. If we had to make a vote for EVERY BAN OFFENSE, to gauge players’ opinions, it would take far too long to make a judgement.
We aren’t changing anything. You are one of the only people who has an issue with our ban system. Why fix what isn’t broken?
I’ll reiterate what I said earlier. If people feel their ban was unjust, they can appeal. It’s what we have it there for. Not to be rude, but your proposals are understood, but we don’t have any interest in changing our ban system, and most likely, if we did, that’s a discussion that would start at a STAFF LEVEL, not a public one.
And as for “giving the griefed final say in bans”, so you’re saying if I don’t like someone, and they grief me minorly, since he griefed me minorly, I should be able to just say “fuck you, permaban”? Aren’t you trying to suggest ways AROUND the permaban? And what if the “griefed” can’t get online? Then we have even more appeals piling up in lingo. Your idea here is flawed rather badly. It would just CREATE MORE ISSUES than what you believe we have now.
1,500 blocks is a ban. No questions asks. That’s way to much to consider an unban.
Offense “category” should not matter. If they’ve been banned before, that means that they broke the rules, and did something that provoked us to take action against them. If they screw up again, they are very unlikely to recieve a second chance. We can’t afford to keep people around like that.
We remain as unbiased as possible. For example; the brief incident with Asmo and Vir. They’re friends in real life, and Asmo did what he felt needed to be done. I don’t see this as being a gigantic issue.
I can see the points in this. There are certain things that we always permaban for, ex. major griefing, exploiting, xray, etc. If someone is very apologetic in their appeal, and tells us 100% truth, we’re likely to give them a long tempban. (ex. Del’s ban, or originally, Verna’s 6-month tempban (extended due to the fact that she lied and didn’t tell us everything)) In Matt’s case, he was a bit of a dick about it, and lied. Regardless of whether he was frustrated or not, he still should’ve remained calm and mature.
Not sure how I feel about this.
Done, done, and done.
This.
Regarding the 1st bit, pretty much what zak said. We’re not changing what isn’t broken.
As for this stuff:
We already have guidelines for this type of thing on the staff boards which I am not going to make public.
[b]Section II. [/b] Harrassment bans Anyone who criticizes someone on race, religion, sexual orientation, gender, looks, or rank on the server should be warned to stop. If they do not, they should be banned (and made to appeal)[b]THIS ALREADY HAPPENS[/b]
I meant 150, my apologies.
[/quote]
Correction. I am the only person who has said something.
Correct me if in wrong @TheKingOfSweden , but i’m really not understanding what you want to change other than basically us having community input via public votes, and if thats all you’re asking for, and I’m being realistic here, it isn’t going to happen. You seem to believe that there is an issue of staff bias, which I can assure you that the majority of staff are not biased. If you’re wanting to involve other players in the ban process (which is against the current rules), this is just swinging open the proverbial door to bias, which would indubitably result in a corrupt system which would then require staff intervention, thereby making the entire process a copious waste of time and energy.
It seems pretty clear, the staff don’t think the system needs to change, and mind you, some of them have been here for years and have probably tried some of your suggestions previously. Also, most of the other community members don’t seem to see issues with the current system. Basically, if you feel like you don’t deserve a ban, use the appeal form, thats why its there, to APPEAL a ban that you think was unfair/unjustified.
TLDR; Shit probably isn’t going to change.
Im gonna go ahead and suggest a lock on this topic, as its just turning into to-ing and fro-ing of little details, and clearly isn’t going anywhere productive. I’ll leave it to @Ouhai_Ruby @PrinceMark @madant79 to decide, as they seem to be the most involved.
At the current moment I am simply throwing around ideas. It seems to me that @jmvvana and @The_Jacob are mixed about this, agreeing in some aspects and disagreeing with others. @VirBinarus has also made some fun statistics about this, and seems to be mixed.
Everyone above, please correct me if I am wrong.
Now that I have said that, would any of you mind providing ideas? I seem to have lost my initial gusto.
Also, to staff, if you could please refrain from locking this for just a while longer, I believe that we can come to agreement in at least one area.
I think most of us have already come to agreement.
This. Sorry dude. Our system needs no changing, and if it does, staff will decide how it needs to be done. There’s no ‘agreements’ needed. To be honest, if you’re unhappy with our system as it is- not to be rude- no one’s making you stay.
We’ve no reasons to change anything. Please let it go already.
I don’t think that Amphi should have not banned me. I certantly don’t think he should be reprimanded. The way I said it, he did the right thing to get rid of me.
Homosexuality to me is as bad as murder, lying and swearingas opposed to
Homosexuality for me is a sin, just like lying and swearing, but still forgiveable.
Is it just me or does the first not sound a tiny bit intolerant. If Amphi hadn’t banned me, [or at least temp-banned], there would have been little hope of me stopping. It might have got worse.
The one thing, that I did not think was right about that, was my inability to respond to my own, unlocked appeal.
I second the locking of the thread.
I third the lock.
Unless another staff member sees fit to unlock this, I am locking this thread as of now.