tobylane

Sometimes that is what we want. We can't predict, we don't have the time to investigate, and we don't want to allow too many bad back in with the good. We aren't that desperate. Please think about a way to know the difference between someone who learns the lesson straightaway, and someone who will have a history with the admins rivalling Forzaire.

Yes barney, but place some limit on how far in the opposite direction you're going otherwise it sounds incomplete. Dispensing enough justice is the issue it's been all along, a four week holiday is nothing to someone who has no attachment to Nerd but an agonising lesson to someone as attached as I believe shwk is. There isn't a one size fits all snugly, and I've not seen a compelling reason why we should do anything less than aim to cover as many people as possible, ie everyone gets what the 90th percentile needs. Do you want mods to be judging for themselves how long each person needs, and for their/the admin's word to be final?

Those who strive not to make mistakes of the past make new mistakes. See France from 1790-1890, Chile, etc. I'm still for near-universal rollbacks, could you give some general description of who shouldn't be rolled back?

I agree, but to ignore the opposite of that isn't pragmatic. It's somewhere in between, and I don't think there isn anyone right in the middle who can say what is balanced. If the town is only punished in losing that player and not their edits, as has happened in few select occasions when it ruined a town, is that acceptable? It may not happen as often as suits you, but that is how you'll be motivated to make sure they change their behaviour when they return. If the town members that the banned person are in contact with are positive about the server and the person's future involvement then they won't go off somewhere else. These considerable builders are invested in what they've done and won't throw it away easily, and won't abandon it just for a four week ban - unless they're being told negative things or simply aren't mature, right? If a newbie breaks the rules how do we know we want that person around? We, as in the community of P and C, aren't that desperate for new players. I'm open for adjusting the first time ban for pretty much any offence but only for when there's some reason to believe they don't need to be told rules to be a nice person.

You don't know the character of the person you have working beside you, just as the admins don't know the character of the person on their public server. The fault is equal if there is any. You're focusing on an extreme and personal example, could you find a more common example?

You're starting with the need for the player and their items and world edits to be around unaffected. The staff are starting with the need for the punishment to be felt and considered. I think you're starting at opposite ends of the scale. I don't want a formula, I like how it is plus maybe more discretion. The following is only the best way I could think of to show this. It's steep but that can be tweaked easily. Ban time in weeks = 4 * (1.5 * number of past xrays) * (1.5 * number of years with past xray) * (1 for player, 1.5 for current or past staff). Plus if requested by the community - * (1 - 0.5 * Contribution to the community in current revision as judged by local staff).

Wasn't that how it used to be until people were unhappy that punishable actions went punished by those chosen to punish? I see it as the rule as the problem and they'll use anything to find an out of their time away. Maybe now Survival is down we can go back to that way, judgement and discretion. Was there ever an on-going problem with mods' judgement on P or C? edit: I think I said this a year ago. Put out some names of people you want to be staff. They must be willing to be mods for a while first, and have the time for mod and admin tasks. Personally I'd rule anyone out who apologised for breaking a rule and then did it again, but I guess not everyone will agree. I think that would rule me out and I still think it's a good idea.

The concept of privacy online is common sense to only a few people. People only expect it if they never gave it any thought and have little experience online, or need it to be true to suit them. We can't predict when people will change their opinion to suit their side, so we can't please everyone.

Some of what moderators do is not written down in the rules as something a player can expect from them. That makes the regulations shorter, that makes less red tape. If you want predictability you need more red tape. If you want more actions by mods they need to not burn out and lastly new mods of quality the admins can trust. Some of the red tape is only there because users felt the mods weren't using their discretion evenly and requested clarity, so how do you get the evenness between players you want with the lack of red tape you want?

You're probably going to have to get used to me, or at least people who you don't like. I also like some of what you say in post 10. I don't think it's possible to stop polite, well-meaning people to feel they are occasionally walking on eggshells. I don't think it would be wise to abandon the subreddit, but I would like all meaningful discussion to be here. Red tape is vague, this seems like something you could say until we're copying 2b2t. More mods may not make the change you want, unless you want more time spent being a staff member. I saw that as a bad thing in your eyes before. More mods so fast will lead to untested people doing surprising things - not worth the hassle of dealing with that let alone the complaints I can imagine. PVE is too big to move off spigot, Creative is too optimised to be playable to move off spigot. S could, but I can't speak for what mod tools are available on vanilla. The wiki is over neglected, but also undefined. Zomise, and many other long term moderators are up to the standard where past admins were promoted, but only because there was a need for more admins at the time. From what I know of their server, which is directly from them in many cases, it's pay to win and reliant on childish whims (my words). I was an active member of junction, in playing and later planning. There are planning documents I linked to at various points of S discussions and I might do that again. If I'm the only one linking to them then maybe they get discounted as stupid, but you only need to read them to see for yourself. I remember that minimalism for tshirts was important at the time the glasses logo was picked, lets use that. Tebok c45y has a good point. What was wanted by the community while you (tebok, or any past staff member who is unhappy) were in a position to do things? I'm assuming you achieved some things, said no to others, and couldn't get around to a long list.

You're welcome to present a plan of how the downsized community should look like. Don't use any previous plans, and do use the feedback that was given when they were all turned down.

Did you run away from me about a day ago?

Stars Dance tour live. Fan video with near perfect audio.

1.9 will be next year.

I can be passive-aggressive too. But there's too much joy in the world for that, edit: Well, I can't be seen being productive so I'll edit an old post. I hate rule lawyering and when possible I push for the rules to stay as vague as the staff want, for the mods to keep the power of discretion. The one time I remember not being happy with a moderator's decision I took it as the price to pay for an otherwise extremely well run server. I can't expect a variety of personalities and timezones in players and staff without accepting the possibility that they reach a decision I wouldn't.

Don't worry, I don't care what I think about this either.

Jkayani come on IRC or P, most of the people who haven't burned out on Minecraft or our community are there. Many of the others would probably rather hear from you than from the admins.

But don't actually.