Banning Policy

[EeHee2000]

I think we should throw in a second, one-page book with the basic rules and gameplay mechanics for players that are entirely new here and still deciding whether they're going to stay at nerd.nu. 
Should they choose to stay at nerd, they'd be well off to read the original book, the one we're using now. That way people looking to jump straight into the action aren't going to instantly log off at the fear of having to read. 
Whilst BeastBruiser says that the book is a helpful resource, it's also a bit intimidating for new players that want to pick up the game and play straight away. 

[BeastBruiser]

I like the idea of having two books. Maybe one that is just the rules, and a second that explains gameplay- just so the book labeled "rulebook" isn't quite so daunting

[TornadoHorse]

Or just have 1 book with a short summary of the rules in there somewhere, with the rest informing players of plugins, commands and making the server feel like a fun place to be. All relevant rules are listed at spawn, links to the rules page on every site we have and the in game book - I think that should probably be enough. We may need to change our moderation style slightly from a "You knew what you were doing wrong, banned!" to a "Ah, well we don't allow that here, thanks for understanding". It'll make us more approachable and probably more cooperative among the current community also.

[TheRandomnatrix]

I like the idea of having two books. Maybe one that is just the rules, and a second that explains gameplay- just so the book labeled "rulebook" isn't quite so daunting

I like that idea. Give 2 books, one with the rules laid out as clearly and as easy to read as possible, and a second "guidebook" that gives an introduction to the server they're on and all its plugins and features, outlining why we're an interesting server worth staying on.

 

We may need to change our moderation style slightly from a "You knew what you were doing wrong, banned!" to a "Ah, well we don't allow that here, thanks for understanding". It'll make us more approachable and probably more cooperative among the current community also.

That is basically what we do now, save for more egregious offences like xray and mass grief.

[jllmprrt]

Whoops, I accidentally downvoted roastnewt's thread. Fuckin' mouse

[Diznatch52]

BUMP. Have any discussions been happening at a higher level as a result of this thread?

[Aypop]

I think there needs to be some concrete analysis of the rules and bans (probably headed by the admins) in order to quantify our banning policy in action. I've talked with draykhar regarding a possible measure of the threat of griefers for example on C. If we don't have facts and numbers (besides occasional peculiar anecdotes) to a

describe the effects of our banning policy on the community, then we're shooting blind.

I do think the rulebooks provided are large and boding, and would like those briefly summarized. The rules at nerd.nu/rules, however, are fine where they are in terms of length.

It's important for players to have good relations with staff, so I suggest we provide a way for players to report bugs and exploits to mods and admins without fear of being banned or otherwise punished. And the staff should make addressing these kinds of bugs or plugins a priority. This is especially important on P and S, where mods and admins are responsible for the integrity of gameplay.

There's also the obvious observation that since these are the Reddit servers, people will come on our servers for the sole purpose of griefing. If we could model griefing behavior through the aforementioned analysis, mods and admins can be better warned of potential griefing by future griefers.

This is kinda a hodge podge of things, but these are in my opinion the most opportune areas of improvement when it comes to banning policy.

[OleToothless]

I think it's difficult to make sure that new players are aware of the rules and the consequences of breaking the rules when they start playing. I know that a lot of y'all on here are going to argue against what I'm about to say and that people should be more respectful/thoughtful/patient when they start playing a game, but hear me out.

 

New players don't give a damn about the rules when the start in for the first time. And they shouldn't - from both their perspective and ours. New players should advance immediately to the game itself and begin to enjoy playing on the Nerd servers so that they have a desire to continue playing and a desire to stay in the community. This is a game that we play and when we start treating it like a job or put so many restrictions on it that it isn't fun, we are all playing it the wrong way.

 

We've all seen the decrease in player base lately. I think that a decent part of this is because people are banned/punished for various infractions, they get upset, and say to hell with it, I'll play COD or find another server. This shouldn't be happening. I understand that we want to keep the servers respectful, considerate and constructive (both with blocks and the community), but forcing people out isn't the way to do that. What I'm arguing I guess is that we should be more inclusive rather than exclusive.

 

A solution to both of these problems (new players not learning the rules right away and regulars/vets being banned and not coming back even to appeal) would require a couple of changes, but nothing so drastic. We have a good system. I personally have been banned and appealed, and now look, I'm playing again, and even trying to contribute to the community. It does work. I just think it could work better. So here's my four suggestions:

 

1. Rewrite the rulebook as others have said previously. Make it short and sweet, with a link to the rules on the wiki. I think it would be cool if we had a plugin that would pop up a message or something for the player when it leaves their inventory that notifies them they are held to the full list of rules on the wiki, just for a final dose of good measure.

 

2. Develop clever ways to teach the rules rather than enforce them. Positive reinforcement is generally better than negative in my opinion. For example, in the spawn room, make it impossible to exit unless you do a certain thing. And have the instructions for how to get out on the same sign that tells you a few basic rules. Maybe even have a little maze. That way, teaching the rules is constructive, positive, and maybe even a little fun.

 

3. Solidify a warning/ban system. I know that we have a policy regarding warning and bans already, but it isn't clearly followed. I know of/have heard about cases where a ban was given out very prematurely or without warning (on offenses that should have had prior warning) and then there's the cases where a player has been warned and warned, banned and banned, and they keep coming back and breaking rules again. It should be pretty simple: you get a warning for basically anything that's not cheating. Then, if you do it again,  you get banned for x time. (obviously cheating/modding is auto ban). Right now, bans can feel like mob rule and that players are subject to the will of the mods/admins, rather than the rules. It can honestly feel very condescending. But if the system is known and actually followed, I think that would seriously reduce some of the drama we get.

 

4. Clearly present the purpose of the rules and consequences. This is going to sound like semantics to most of you, and some of you will probably disagree with me. But I think that one of the worst things that are done with rules on any server is when violation of the rules is expressed in the terms of doing something "wrong" versus doing what's "right". It dictates a morality. Instead, it should be communicated that "a rule was broken" and a "rule was enforced". I don't think any mods represent the rules poorly, but I think it can be done more positively. I think that making it clear that the offender isn't necessarily doing something wrong, but HAS violated the conditions of playing on the server would decrease the drama around here and allow mods to put the impetus of any punishment on the rules, rather than on themselves for enforcing the rules. Make sense? Again, I don't think any mods are going up to people they banned or warned and saying "hey, that was wrong to break all those carrots. because you are an evil carrot breaker and kin to Hitler, you are banned," or anything similar but I think the mods could take a much more positive approach and say something like "Those were somebody else's iron block that you just picked up. That's not in line with the rules of the server, which need to be followed in order to play on this server."... I don't know if I'm making sense at this point. I guess my conclusion would be that the whole system could be much less confrontational and much more procedural without subjecting the server to the objective and impersonal moderation methods that other servers have.

 

 

Just my thoughts. 

[schererererer]

Addressing a couple of specific points:

It's important for players to have good relations with staff, so I suggest we provide a way for players to report bugs and exploits to mods and admins without fear of being banned or otherwise punished. And the staff should make addressing these kinds of bugs or plugins a priority. This is especially important on P and S, where mods and admins are responsible for the integrity of gameplay.

Bugs and exploits can be reported to staff via modreq, just like everything else (or an irc pm if it's more urgent) . I've never seen anyone get punished for merely reporting a exploit after discovering one, only for continuing to explore an exploit beyond the point of verification - and I've seen many in my time.

2. Develop clever ways to teach the rules rather than enforce them. Positive reinforcement is generally better than negative in my opinion. For example, in the spawn room, make it impossible to exit unless you do a certain thing. And have the instructions for how to get out on the same sign that tells you a few basic rules. Maybe even have a little maze. That way, teaching the rules is constructive, positive, and maybe even a little fun.

As the person who first introduced the use of a "maze-like" (or at least somewhat coercive) ruleset presentation at pve spawn years ago, I feel I'm qualified to label this concept as folly. The specter of forced reading of the rules was roundly rejected as discouraging to new players in a time when server populations were high, and the final product, though trimmed down to a simple, relatively long hallway, was roundly criticized. Ultimately, those who don't want to read the rules won't, and are likely to break them.

Today's response to rulebreaking is absolutely more lenient than any time in the past; population decline cannot seriously be attributed to harshness.

The complexity of the rulesets are a direct result of long-term player complaints that the rules were too vague and open to interpretation (and thus frequent claims of mod abuse and favoritism), most notoriously the "don't be a dick" mantra. The rules are there with a historical context in mind - the simple version is outlined in signs at spawn, and shouldn't be difficult to remember.