Inform community about community related punishments

[Darwins_Bane]

Oh dear. Try reading my post properly and from an objective standpoint. I am well aware of Andy's post, and I have stated that I am all up for a compromise but if it is not moved towards, and people rather keep arguing about other points, this topic has no place in my forum. I never put a time limit or time scale on when I was going to be locking/moving this thread, I was just reiterating one or two points. Namely, that this suggestion will not be happening no matter what, and that a compromise must now either be thought of or this thread has no place here.

Cheers, JB

I suggested a couple changes to QH, when she gets it and has time she'll post something here.

[AAFitz]

this topic has no place in my forum.

Cheers, JB

do you really think of this as your forum now? Or do you just mean it has no place in suggs?

[king sam]

QH from what I get from your last post after Andy's suggestion is that you really just want people's dirty laundry aired out there, because their cheaters or have been found guitly of a site violaion and thus you think they deserve no second chance and should get a public flogging.

By making the following statement please tell me what good it brings to anyone or the situation:

eddie2 was Busted with the huhidontget_it, scarecrow & iloveksandlv accounts

the current standard that you get is a file proclaiming eddie2 being in vioalation of the rule, an investigation and the following responses from a Hunter or C&A mod

Busted

or

Cleared

The other accounts that are found Guilty of a mulitple account Bust are GUESTED and wont return. Only the main account is able to re-purchase back in to the site. (Stipulations, yada.. yada..yada)

So what good does it do to name out the other accounts? Are you going to Foe them?
They wont be back so it wont matter.
The only way they will come back is up there was an error on our part in the Bust or verdict, and therefor it further proves why you shouldnt air the names out there for users to get Burned at the stake and later be found innocent.

Right now in C&A you get this:
Busted = Busted with more then 1 account

all accounts that werent the primary are Guested and the primary if it was a premium player gets turned to freemium with the option to buy back in. or if the primary account was a freemium and found guilty they can only get back in the site by upgrading to a premium status.

Cleared = Cleared of wrong doing

Warned = Warned for whatever associated violation that was brought up on them, you can take the time and read through the thread involving this situation and understand what they were Warned for

Vacation = the user has surpassed the Warning stages of this violation and have entered into the Vacation stage. All part of the progression of actions handed down outlined in the guidelines

If you need us to spell it out for you like this from now on then we can:

eddie2 was Warned for Ratings Abuse

But I would think that you could put 2 and 2 together. You have already stated that you agree that we shouldnt divulge our methods or what we talk about in our forum about how we came to the conclusion on a case, so I dont see your point here on blasting the other accounts found in vioaltions, mainly multi accounts that wont ever play under that username again.

And I belive we do provide an explanation on most cases as to why we have concluded this except multis to show a trend and the level of what we hold as a standard when it comes to violations.

So in conclusion I have looked at your perspective and I dont see the added value this brings to anything

KS

[king sam]

double post...

please dont rebuttle with the KingBurger ratings accounts..

that was one of the exceptions where he transfered his active account to that ungodly one that i wouldnt waste to type out everytime i accessed the site. That was an exception to the rule and all his dirty deeds under the KingBurger account were transferred to that one.

We shouldnt change site policy on the account of the 10 exceptions to the rules that happen every year should we?

[AAFitz]

QH from what I get from your last post after Andy's suggestion is that you really just want people's dirty laundry aired out there, because their cheaters or have been found guitly of a site violaion and thus you think they deserve no second chance and should get a public flogging.

By making the following statement please tell me what good it brings to anyone or the situation:

eddie2 was Busted with the huhidontget_it, scarecrow & iloveksandlv accounts

the current standard that you get is a file proclaiming eddie2 being in vioalation of the rule, an investigation and the following responses from a Hunter or C&A mod

Busted

or

Cleared

The other accounts that are found Guilty of a mulitple account Bust are GUESTED and wont return. Only the main account is able to re-purchase back in to the site. (Stipulations, yada.. yada..yada)

So what good does it do to name out the other accounts? Are you going to Foe them?
They wont be back so it wont matter.
The only way they will come back is up there was an error on our part in the Bust or verdict, and therefor it further proves why you shouldnt air the names out there for users to get Burned at the stake and later be found innocent.

Right now in C&A you get this:
Busted = Busted with more then 1 account

all accounts that werent the primary are Guested and the primary if it was a premium player gets turned to freemium with the option to buy back in. or if the primary account was a freemium and found guilty they can only get back in the site by upgrading to a premium status.

Cleared = Cleared of wrong doing

Warned = Warned for whatever associated violation that was brought up on them, you can take the time and read through the thread involving this situation and understand what they were Warned for

Vacation = the user has surpassed the Warning stages of this violation and have entered into the Vacation stage. All part of the progression of actions handed down outlined in the guidelines

If you need us to spell it out for you like this from now on then we can:

eddie2 was Warned for Ratings Abuse

But I would think that you could put 2 and 2 together. You have already stated that you agree that we shouldnt divulge our methods or what we talk about in our forum about how we came to the conclusion on a case, so I dont see your point here on blasting the other accounts found in vioaltions, mainly multi accounts that wont ever play under that username again.

And I belive we do provide an explanation on most cases as to why we have concluded this except multis to show a trend and the level of what we hold as a standard when it comes to violations.

So in conclusion I have looked at your perspective and I dont see the added value this brings to anything

KS

I myself would rather know the other account names everyone gets busted with...however, I do think it is far more professional not to do so.

There is one possible downside to that, but its pretty thin. Technically, it might not discourage multis from making lots of multis if it isnt known how many they made. Knowing a player made one multi, is somewhat different than knowing they made 10 or so, because a person making 10 probably is viewed differently than someone who made one...especially since single multi busts often do have multiple explanations, and can often be harmless enough, whereas any player making 10, obviously has no respect for the rules whatsoever, so people may very well want to avoid them at all costs.

Theoretically, one could also argue that seeing the names they chose, might make it easier to spot more of their multis in the future, and avoid them. Further, the person who reports them can learn from their report which ones they were correct about, or wrong about.

I completely agree that the information need not be given, though the number of accounts really is relevant information for those few reasons.

As someone who definitely has reported some multi multis, I can definitely say that knowing the accounts they were busted with has indeed been educational as to what to look for in multi accounts since. Very often more have been identified, even in the same game that they were reported in that I missed, which no doubt has helped me and others know what to look for.

My point is, there actually are tangible reasons to know the information, but I still agree that its far more professional not to post personal information, and brand players with a scarlet "M"

[THORNHEART]

Quite simply it has never been cc's policy to discuss private matters between us and the users....we respect their privacy. If you are curious pm them yourselves. We however wont.

CC doesnt respect anything about any member. I love that pm them yourself part...that works real well when you have a mystirious 3 month forum ban don't it?

What a fucking joke..this is a great suggestion but the problem is it would make the mods have to have some accountability. Can't have that!! O.O

[AAFitz]

Quite simply it has never been cc's policy to discuss private matters between us and the users....we respect their privacy. If you are curious pm them yourselves. We however wont.

CC doesnt respect anything about any member. I love that pm them yourself part...that works real well when you have a mystirious 3 month forum ban don't it?

What a fucking joke..this is a great suggestion but the problem is it would make the mods have to have some accountability. Can't have that!! O.O

The mods have plenty of accountability. If people dont like their decisions, they are always free to leave the site.

[king sam]

The mods have plenty of accountability. If people dont like their decisions, they are always free to leave the site.

Good post Fitz, great points..

I do think for the most part we post Busted with 8 accounts or such and such.. I will defintley make sure I am doing this in the future

[THORNHEART]

gonna answer the pm them yourself part???

its kinda hard to get the story from a banned memeber

[king sam]

gonna answer the pm them yourself part???

its kinda hard to get the story from a banned memeber

im talking about the good response in refernce to justifiable reasons to post how many accounts someone was Busted with

[THORNHEART]

ok

[Woodruff]

this topic has no place in my forum.

Cheers, JB

do you really think of this as your forum now? Or do you just mean it has no place in suggs?

Joshy is a Suggestions Moderator, and this is the Suggestions forum...so I don't think it's unreasonable for him to feel some sense of ownership of it...that sort of attitude will help him to keep his motivation for the job, in my opinion.

[Bones2484]

So just out of curiosity... why are we worried about the "privacy" of members who have been caught cheating? I don't understand why it's a bad thing to list all the accounts associated with a multi bust for people to reference if need be. Will listing multi accounts someone is busted with affect their personal or internet life in ANY fashion? They've already been publicly found guilty of cheating, what will knowing the other names do to their "privacy"?

Regardless of the fact that "privacy" on an internet gaming site is a joke of a concept anyways, don't cheats forfeit that right if it does exist in the minds of others?

[JoshyBoy]

this topic has no place in my forum.

Cheers, JB

do you really think of this as your forum now? Or do you just mean it has no place in suggs?

Joshy is a Suggestions Moderator, and this is the Suggestions forum...so I don't think it's unreasonable for him to feel some sense of ownership of it...that sort of attitude will help him to keep his motivation for the job, in my opinion.

The Suggestions Forum is my responsibility, I have to look after it, and my "job" is to keep it functioning properly and effectively.

[Queen_Herpes]

this topic has no place in my forum.

Cheers, JB

do you really think of this as your forum now? Or do you just mean it has no place in suggs?

Joshy is a Suggestions Moderator, and this is the Suggestions forum...so I don't think it's unreasonable for him to feel some sense of ownership of it...that sort of attitude will help him to keep his motivation for the job, in my opinion.

The Suggestions Forum is my responsibility, I have to look after it, and my "job" is to keep it functioning properly and effectively.

Please stay on topic, thank you.

[AndyDufresne]

So just out of curiosity... why are we worried about the "privacy" of members who have been caught cheating? I don't understand why it's a bad thing to list all the accounts associated with a multi bust for people to reference if need be. Will listing multi accounts someone is busted with affect their personal or internet life in ANY fashion? They've already been publicly found guilty of cheating, what will knowing the other names do to their "privacy"?

Regardless of the fact that "privacy" on an internet gaming site is a joke of a concept anyways, don't cheats forfeit that right if it does exist in the minds of others?

For me, the privacy issue is maybe 5% of the concern I have with the suggestion. The other 95% concern mostly comes out of time-sink-holes, either coding related or volunteer service related.


--Andy

[Queen_Herpes]

So just out of curiosity... why are we worried about the "privacy" of members who have been caught cheating? I don't understand why it's a bad thing to list all the accounts associated with a multi bust for people to reference if need be. Will listing multi accounts someone is busted with affect their personal or internet life in ANY fashion? They've already been publicly found guilty of cheating, what will knowing the other names do to their "privacy"?

Regardless of the fact that "privacy" on an internet gaming site is a joke of a concept anyways, don't cheats forfeit that right if it does exist in the minds of others?

For me, the privacy issue is maybe 5% of the concern I have with the suggestion. The other 95% concern mostly comes out of time-sink-holes, either coding related or volunteer service related.


--Andy

Edited the original post what follows here is now the only concern of this suggestion:

Per suggestion from eddie2, create a locked and stickied thread in the C&A Forum titled "busts"
Post all punishments (not warnings) as a response to the thread like this:

• Comment: Queen Herpes [Forum Ban] (Include more information if necessary or per personal choice of the C&A mod who is posting.
• Comment: Queen Herpes [Multis] (Include more information if necessary or per personal choice of the C&A mod who is posting.) Per suggestion from AAFitz, include the total number of multiple accounts created. Also per suggestion from AAFitz, include the names of the banned usernames in the event that the usernames created are similar and can be recognized in the future.
• Comment: Queen Herpes [Communication Ban 1 month ends July 27, 2010] (Include more information if necessary or personal choice of the C&A mod who is posting.)

[eddie2]

this sounds goodbecause the point that is being used against this is the programming this is not needed for this option

[Woodruff]

this sounds goodbecause the point that is being used against this is the programming this is not needed for this option

No, the argument is the time that would be WASTED on this suggestion. A part of that is the programming, but far from all of it.

this topic has no place in my forum.

Cheers, JB

do you really think of this as your forum now? Or do you just mean it has no place in suggs?

Joshy is a Suggestions Moderator, and this is the Suggestions forum...so I don't think it's unreasonable for him to feel some sense of ownership of it...that sort of attitude will help him to keep his motivation for the job, in my opinion.

The Suggestions Forum is my responsibility, I have to look after it, and my "job" is to keep it functioning properly and effectively.

Please stay on topic, thank you.

Yes, you should definitely stay on topic, Queen_Herpes. I expect you to do so in the future.

[Queen_Herpes]

No, the argument is the time that would be WASTED on this suggestion. A part of that is the programming, but far from all of it.

Please explain.

[king sam]

the current obstacle you have to overcome is proving such a need for it that it outweighs the time lost and manpower it would take to maintain a separate thread thats existence is there just to have a quick reference for players and their violations when you already have that info in the associated C&A claim.

edit: it would be a incredibly handy tool to have at your feet, but I see this taking a lot of time in the maintenance of it, time that is probably used better catching the players that violate the rules

[Darwins_Bane]

well then perhaps you could just modify the code you already have to do it. Print a line out to the user's profile when you bust them. It wouldnt take much more coding to do. basically if you ban someone it also prints out a line to their profile saying user cannot communicate. and if a multi is busted then same thing. since i already imagine you do something similar, it wouldnt be hard and would have a really easy place to check. the user profile of the person you're accusing. same thing could happen even if someone was cleared. this would probably clear up spurious complaints somewhat and also satisfy the suggestion here.

[Queen_Herpes]

the current obstacle you have to overcome is proving such a need for it that it outweighs the time lost and manpower it would take to maintain a separate thread thats existence is there just to have a quick reference for players and their violations when you already have that info in the associated C&A claim.

edit: it would be a incredibly handy tool to have at your feet, but I see this taking a lot of time in the maintenance of it, time that is probably used better catching the players that violate the rules

You missed the point of the thread. It is there to list the punishments made behind-the-scenes. Already public posted busts probably don't need to be listed, as they are already posted in diff. public threads.

I appreciate the work performed by the C&A mods and I don't mean to make their lives difficult. I'm willing to volunteer my time to type one-line bust comments in the suggested: dedicated-stickied-locked thread. Just send me a PM each time and then I will post the 60-character bust info.

edit: Darwin's Bane's post prior to mine also works. Remember that I am just looking for it for cases from implementation day forward. Nothing in the past unless some mod wants to research that and do it, but from the sounds of it, no mod has the time.

[lord voldemort]

well then perhaps you could just modify the code you already have to do it. Print a line out to the user's profile when you bust them. It wouldnt take much more coding to do. basically if you ban someone it also prints out a line to their profile saying user cannot communicate. and if a multi is busted then same thing. since i already imagine you do something similar, it wouldnt be hard and would have a really easy place to check. the user profile of the person you're accusing. same thing could happen even if someone was cleared. this would probably clear up spurious complaints somewhat and also satisfy the suggestion here.

this already exists...they get exclusive membership to the guests clan

[eddie2]

well then perhaps you could just modify the code you already have to do it. Print a line out to the user's profile when you bust them. It wouldnt take much more coding to do. basically if you ban someone it also prints out a line to their profile saying user cannot communicate. and if a multi is busted then same thing. since i already imagine you do something similar, it wouldnt be hard and would have a really easy place to check. the user profile of the person you're accusing. same thing could happen even if someone was cleared. this would probably clear up spurious complaints somewhat and also satisfy the suggestion here.

this already exists...they get exclusive membership to the guests clan

if they are premium they do not they go freemium and can buy premium back.