Banning Policy

[Mrloud15]

I would like to start a civil discussion about our banning policy here.

 

[BCB228]

 

Denevien, on 03 Jul 2014 - 12:09 AM, said:

I'll admit I've made a few people beg, but the steps I listed is not begging. It is a chance to prove they are capable of following directions.

 

gsand -What circumstances caused them to beg?

 

What is the point of proving that they are capable of following orders? Is it necessary.

 

Denevien, on 03 Jul 2014 - 12:09 AM, said:

If you can't follow the rules, then you can't play here

 

gsand -Of course not, but that is not what is being discussed here.

 

I would like Denevien to answer this, it was brought up multiple times last thread with no answers before the lock (which there was no reason for)

Edited July 4, 2014 by BCB228

[Denevien]

https://nerd.nu/forums/index.php?/topic/2254-congratulations-on-100k-total-server-bans/?p=16060

[BCB228]

I didnt notice that in the last thread, thanks denevien.

 

I would also like to discuss this again:

 

Me: 1 year for calling players autistic shitlords in chat

Randomdoor: till the end of the rev for calling admins Autistic,cunts, and even (negro) ( http://nerd.nu/archi...0#Comment_65760 )

 

Randomdoor was banned multiple times just like i was, and if im correct he was only unbanned for about a week before banned again just like me.

[Denevien]

I didnt notice that in the last thread, thanks denevien.

 

I would also like to discuss this again:

 

Me: 1 year for calling players autistic shitlords in chat

Randomdoor: till the end of the rev for calling admins Autistic,cunts, and even (negro) ( http://nerd.nu/archi...0#Comment_65760 )

 

Randomdoor was banned multiple times just like i was, and if im correct he was only unbanned for about a week before banned again just like me.

 

I thought you said:

 

I dont want to argue about my ban in a public thread but: I was banned for something that is vaguely mentioned in the rules.

 

But anyway, this was already answered by Mrloud15:

 

You were warned that any future infractions will result in a ban length of at least a year. That where the year came from, not just from you saying those things.

Random had received no such warning beforehand.

[BCB228]

 

I dont want to argue about my ban in a public thread but: I was banned for something that is vaguely mentioned in the rules.

 

 

also my ban reason has changed from what it originally was after i talked to redwall_hp. If you really need to change the reason the player is banned after they are banned, they shouldnt be banned in the first place.

 

 

 

Edited July 4, 2014 by BCB228
edited formatting of font to work on multiple themes

[joshuaherman]

Summary of statistics in the last thread.

 

Data to the rescue! This is a plot of number of bans per day. As you can see, the trend line clearly shows we are severely reducing number of bans given out.

 

% of total bans per year:

2014 =  2.4% so far

2013 = 12.3%

2012 = 51.0%

2011 = 34.3%

 

 

This graph shows the number of "Connections per Ban" since 2011-11-19. As you can see, the trend is that more connections are being made with less bans.

 

 

 

 

Combining the total amount of bans on mcbouncer and glitzer we make up 22% of the bans.

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1U570AMnQqhLxrlguPuYQFQ8bExd1oiWiTjL3xWn_HY0/edit#gid=0

[BCB228]

How about the temp bans and chat filter? Since the servers have such strict rules on what you can say in chat both of these plugins would reduce anything bad in chat and more people will come back if they are temp banned.

[Denevien]

How about the temp bans and chat filter? Since the servers have such strict rules on what you can say in chat both of these plugins would reduce anything bad in chat and more people will come back if they are temp banned.

I like Unce's idea (https://nerd.nu/forums/index.php?/topic/2254-congratulations-on-100k-total-server-bans/?p=16004). We're looking to it as a possibility.

[barneygale]

Please make the data used to generate the graphs publicly available.

[BCB228]

Another thing i would like to discuss: I think the ban appeal system is way too public. If a player is banned and would like to appeal their banned it should only be between the banning admin and player in a private thread. It is almost like public shaming a player for what they did wrong to get banned.

Edited July 4, 2014 by BCB228

[coolgamerovr90]

Another thing i would like to discuss: I think the ban appeal system is way too public. If a player is banned and would like to appeal their banned it should only be between the banning admin and player in a private thread. It is almost like public shaming a player for what they did wrong to get banned.

Edit: I don't support that idea anymore

Edited July 5, 2014 by coolgamerovr90

[TheRandomnatrix]

Another thing i would like to discuss: I think the ban appeal system is way too public. If a player is banned and would like to appeal their banned it should only be between the banning admin and player in a private thread.

That's a terrible idea. It blows any sense of staff-player transparency out the window. All it will lead to is some players starting shit in PMs over serious topics like bans to then use as weapons against the staff, and the rest of the community calling for them to be made public again. I'm reminded of this quote by mrloud. 

It is almost like public shaming a player for what they did wrong to get banned.

Yea. It kinda is. I think knowing that everyone else will know you(speaking in generalities) fucked up is a far bigger punishment than a ban length, and serves as a pretty good deterrent to those players who are actually invested in being a productive member of the community. And then there are players who don't care what they say and do, in which case they don't have a problem admitting what they did was wrong. Having appeals be made public is better for archiving as well, as it's easy to dig up past bans that way, versus PMs which are infinitely harder to find.

 

 

I didn't get to say my thoughts on temp-bans before the thread was locked. I sort of agree with Eehee that they are an extension of a kick or mute and are to be done for very small infractions like chat spam or minor crop grief. I can't see myself using them for anything other than a few days at most for a length. It might cut back on the number of newbs who get banned for something minor and never return. However, I do agree with Crockoduck in that a lot of the time they'll either say screw it and move on to a different server, or come back learning absolutely nothing and continue to break rules. I'm not against a trial run for a few months to see how something like that goes. If nothing else it'll become another tool staff can use to deal with people.

 

I do want to point out that I'm strongly against heavy automation of moderation and banning. I've been to my fair share of large servers that implement it to a degree, and most of the time chat is toxic with few to no staff around to manage it, and if you get banned for something it feels like you don't have anyone to bring it up with to get unbanned.

[BCB228]

BCB228, on 04 Jul 2014 - 5:57 PM, said:

It is almost like public shaming a player for what they did wrong to get banned.

Yea. It kinda is. I think knowing that everyone else will know you(speaking in generalities) fucked up is a far bigger punishment than a ban length, and serves as a pretty good deterrent to those players who are actually invested in being a productive member of the community. 

 

 

That is not right at all. Players are already getting punished for their actions in game by the ban. 

[jllmprrt]

That is not right at all. Players are already getting punished for their actions in game by the ban.

I mean to be fair, they get banned because they break the rules. I don't know if like we could allow players to make a temporary forum account if they only come to get unbanned or something. If players really feel shamed about appealing I guess they could do that privately, but you seem to be more mad about getting banned than anything else, even though you showed no shame in doing so in your appeal.

"In all honesty I wouldn't care to be banned or unbanned. It was fun for the couple days i got to play and say hi to old friends while trying to make players mad (which worked I guess? lol)"

[Difficult1]

From what i have witnessed, sometimes its way to strict and sometimes its way to lenient....all at the wrong times it seems. Im interested in what would be done to repeat offenders and when is the time to fully punish them. For example, if someone is banned for a long time such as a year or 44 weeks, why would we have any reason to believe they are going to come back and not do anything, i feel like its just more time to fester and not really learn. An idea for bans could be a strikes system, like if you banned for 8 times in 5 revs (as an example) you would be permabanned. Also, i have seen some people who get preminently banned just appeal the next year and get to come back, how is that supposed to encourage following the rules if you could just appeal even when perminatly banned?

 

 

Edit: decided against making appeals private. I feel that if you banned, you deserve no less, if you dont want to be shamed by it.... 

THEN DONT DO IT!

Edited July 5, 2014 by Difficult1

[BCB228]

I mean to be fair, they get banned because they break the rules. I don't know if like we could allow players to make a temporary forum account if they only come to get unbanned or something. If players really feel shamed about appealing I guess they could do that privately, but you seem to be more mad about getting banned than anything else, even though you showed no shame in doing so in your appeal.

"In all honesty I wouldn't care to be banned or unbanned. It was fun for the couple days i got to play and say hi to old friends while trying to make players mad (which worked I guess? lol)"

Im not mad about my ban at all. I still stick to my "i dont care if im banned or unbanned" but that doesnt mean i wont try to appeal / try to bring change how future situations like mine could have a different outcome.

[ROCKONN]

That is not right at all. Players are already getting punished for their actions in game by the ban. 

The punishment is intended to be the ban duration, this is true. Appeals are made public for several other reasons:

• To ensure that the staff operates in a fair manner, where he/she/they cannot simply brush a ban under the carpet, and so that others can see the rational behind a ban's implementation & its length.
• To give a public record of the ban itself, to inform the community that a player has committed an infraction against the rules.
• To serve as a constant reminder to the community that all actions have consequences, emphasizing respect for the rules to the community.
• To determine if a player has learned anything from their time spent away from the server, such as which actions they need to avoid to prevent a subsequent banning.
• To provide a place for additional information to be brought into an appeal's process which might otherwise not be available. Circumstances unknown to staff members & the like.

Those are just a few of the other reasons, but as a few other people have mentioned the "shaming" involved can be a legitimate part of the punishment. We have no way of knowing what a player is doing during the time they're banned from the servers. They could be off on another server doing the same thing. They could just not be playing Minecraft. This ties in with my (thus-far unposted) feelings towards temporary/timed bans, that someone  could be completely unaffected by what's intended to be a learning experience. The appeal itself is a check to ensure that a player is ready to return to the community. It should therefore be observed by the community as a whole, in the event some other circumstance becomes relevant. That's not to say that the community should determine an appeal's result, far from it, but.... I lack the words. Perhaps someone else has them, or I'll find them in the morning.

Edited July 5, 2014 by ROCKONN

[WayneByNumbers]

I have a quick suggestion.

 

I don't myself like the idea of "temporary bans," at least what I think I've seen so far in the discussion.  I think needing someone to apply for access to a server is a perfectly fair step after they have broken the rules they already agreed to follow by logging in.  It is up to the staff handling such appeals to be fair and avoid "public shaming," as some have put it.  Deliberate humiliation, in my opinion, is not a valid punishment.

 

On the other hand, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of middle ground between warnings/kicks and outright bans.  Perhaps something that compromises the idea of being warned and being banned could fit in and hopefully select for those who would actually be willing to adjust their behavior and play on the servers.  I was thinking something like a "timed kick."  I suppose it could technically be called a temp-ban, but I'm thinking of a duration of something on the order of 5-10 minutes, accompanied with a message explaining that someone can rejoin after the time is up (in addition to whatever kick message is typed in).  For disruptive players, this could give both them and the rest of the players a moment to cool down instead of everyone jumping right back into the fray.  Anyone who waits that long and continues their infractions will have earned their subsequent ban.

 

And since we're discussing banning policy in general, I'd like to link this thread about the treatment of alternate accounts, and see if anything can come of that.

[roastnewt]

I think that's exactly the point of a tempban, Wayne.  It wouldn't supplant bans, just complement them.  If you need someone's assurances that they know the rules and won't break them again, then straight-up ban them.  If you just think they need a few minutes, or even an hour or a day to "cool off," then give them a tempban.  Like I said in the other thread, a tempban shouldn't be a "free unban," it should be used as a "time out" or "cool down period."

[BCB228]

Since this is a discussion about the banning policies, I would like to ask if we could get the ability to send larger pictures to channels in mumble? If i recalled the picture limit size limit was recently added because of one situation between a group of players. I think just because there was 1 accident like this between players it is a little unfair to remove this privilege from every other user. 

[TheRandomnatrix]

Since this is a discussion about the banning policies, I would like to ask if we could get the ability to send larger pictures to channels in mumble? If i recalled the picture limit size limit was recently added because of one situation between a group of players. I think just because there was 1 accident like this between players it is a little unfair to remove this privilege from every other user. 

I've never seen posting images into the sidebar directly to be used for anything other than trolling purposes in my time on mumble. I wanted its removal before the incident in question occurred, and I don't see a legitimate reason for bringing it back. IIRC it's supposed to be completely disabled, but due to technical reasons that isn't possible, so they use an incredibly small file size, and people are circumventing that. If you need to have people see an image, there is nothing stopping you from posting a link that people can click at their own leisure.

[BCB228]

I've never seen posting images into the sidebar directly to be used for anything other than trolling purposes in my time on mumble. I wanted its removal before the incident in question occurred, and I don't see a legitimate reason for bringing it back. IIRC it's supposed to be completely disabled, but due to technical reasons that isn't possible, so they use an incredibly small file size, and people are circumventing that. If you need to have people see an image, there is nothing stopping you from posting a link that people can click at their own leisure.

 

I understand they have been used for trolling that those are specific users trolling. If there are any more reports about trolling the user that is doing it should be punished instead of the whole server. Here are some examples of pictures that i have to use in the mumble chat:

[tobylane]

Another thing i would like to discuss: I think the ban appeal system is way too public. If a player is banned and would like to appeal their banned it should only be between the banning admin and player in a private thread. It is almost like public shaming a player for what they did wrong to get banned.

 

In the real world there's something called case law, also called precedent, or stare decisis. If you heard from the banned player some reasoning used in their ban appeal you'd want the same reasoning used on you. But all you have to go on is their word for what happened, we want that to not be a problem. In some areas of real law large amounts of it are case law not statute law.

 

People fighting their own bans is appeal policy, or cumulative ban length policy, I don't think that should be included in ban policy. Having all these bans extended by past number of infractions is confusing the view of some people, there aren't? good examples of people's first time bans for the same reason. Is there anything wrong with the ban lengths for first time infractions?

[roastnewt]

I've never seen posting images into the sidebar directly to be used for anything other than trolling purposes in my time on mumble. I wanted its removal before the incident in question occurred, and I don't see a legitimate reason for bringing it back. IIRC it's supposed to be completely disabled, but due to technical reasons that isn't possible, so they use an incredibly small file size, and people are circumventing that. If you need to have people see an image, there is nothing stopping you from posting a link that people can click at their own leisure.

 

The size limit means you can't put images in your comment, either