Conquer Club

Posted: **Fri Aug 08, 2008 7:37 pm**

Description

Change the way people are getting banned

Specifics:

Ok i've seen more people get banned from this site alone then from any other websites i've been to. The reason is because the way the bans are given out is wrong.

What needs to happen is there needs to be some sort of ban meter. If you get a lot of warnings the meter goes up. If you don't get any warnings for a long time the meter goes down. It should be like a scale of 1-10 or so. Depending on what type of ban you get it will go up a certain amount. Like it could go up 2 for one thing while only up 1 for another. Then after like a couple months it will go down 1 or so on the meter. Once you get up to 10 on the meter you are banned.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

Right now if someone gets 5 or so warnings and has been on the site 2 months they get perma-banned and also people who have been here 2 years and get 5 warnings are also perma-banned. This isn't fair in many ways since the people here two years have behaved much more and still get treated the same way as the person here two months just because the had a the same amount of warnings.

Posted: **Fri Aug 08, 2008 8:04 pm**

I think that we should remember that mods are players first, mods second...
and have their own opinions...
they should try to remain objective, but are often subjective
now case in point of course is wickid (hi gal!) and she was inconsistent in her actions
what the_lion (yes here I go again) would get a ban for, in same thread another would get away with a warning and a third (me) could repeat the post forever and not get a warning...
inconsistent...

I think you have some valid points timmy...

Posted: **Fri Aug 08, 2008 8:10 pm**

We actually do take into account when the "last offense" occurred, and also what the current "offense" is. We also take into account their past history of "offense types"--I.E. someone with multiple Oversized Signature Warnings is not the same as someone with multiple Trolling warnings.

Very few people have been Perma-banned from this website in its history--under 10 I believe. And those that have been, have severely and repeatedly disregarded the Rules.

--Andy

Posted: **Fri Aug 08, 2008 8:23 pm**

AndyDufresne wrote:We actually do take into account when the "last offense" occurred, and also what the current "offense" is. We also take into account their past history of "offense types"--I.E. someone with multiple Oversized Signature Warnings is not the same as someone with multiple Trolling warnings.

Very few people have been Perma-banned from this website in its history--under 10 I believe. And those that have been, have severely and repeatedly disregarded the Rules.

--Andy

Well we should have some sort of meter to know where we are at. I mean I have no idea how close I am to ban after two warnings.

Posted: **Fri Aug 08, 2008 8:29 pm**

timmytuttut88 wrote:
AndyDufresne wrote:We actually do take into account when the "last offense" occurred, and also what the current "offense" is. We also take into account their past history of "offense types"--I.E. someone with multiple Oversized Signature Warnings is not the same as someone with multiple Trolling warnings.

Very few people have been Perma-banned from this website in its history--under 10 I believe. And those that have been, have severely and repeatedly disregarded the Rules.

--Andy

Well we should have some sort of meter to know where we are at. I mean I have no idea how close I am to ban after two warnings.

How's that beneficial? Making a set in stone system where you get say 2 warnings, 1 day vacation, 3 day vacation, 1 week, etc. only ties the hands of the admins. If you're following the guidelines, then you have nothing to worry about. If everyone had a set meter, then that would mean that they would just cross the line x number of times until they were right up to the final line. That would only cause more problems on the forum.

Posted: **Fri Aug 08, 2008 8:31 pm**

I'm not sure how such a thing would work, as it would need some cross intergration (from the Processing Tool to where ever it would be visible/viewable). Perhaps with an update it may come out sometime.

Until then, I suggest you save any Disciplinary Warning PMs you receive. And if all else fails, you can always contact an Admin/Mod.

--Andy

Posted: **Fri Aug 08, 2008 8:43 pm**

Night Strike wrote:
timmytuttut88 wrote:
AndyDufresne wrote:We actually do take into account when the "last offense" occurred, and also what the current "offense" is. We also take into account their past history of "offense types"--I.E. someone with multiple Oversized Signature Warnings is not the same as someone with multiple Trolling warnings.

Very few people have been Perma-banned from this website in its history--under 10 I believe. And those that have been, have severely and repeatedly disregarded the Rules.

--Andy

Well we should have some sort of meter to know where we are at. I mean I have no idea how close I am to ban after two warnings.

How's that beneficial? Making a set in stone system where you get say 2 warnings, 1 day vacation, 3 day vacation, 1 week, etc. only ties the hands of the admins. If you're following the guidelines, then you have nothing to worry about. If everyone had a set meter, then that would mean that they would just cross the line x number of times until they were right up to the final line. That would only cause more problems on the forum.

People still do that now until a mod says "this is your last warning".

Honestly a ban meter could be very beneficial for people who are about to be banned and don't see it coming.

Posted: **Fri Aug 08, 2008 9:01 pm**

they would know, how could they not? I mean you only get so many chances. It isnt like baseball...where 3 strikes and your gone, you get many chances...

Posted: **Fri Aug 08, 2008 9:03 pm**

clapper011 wrote:they would know, how could they not? I mean you only get so many chances. It isnt like baseball...where 3 strikes and your gone, you get many chances...

well from what i've heard some people get more then others. I mean i've gotten two warnings so one more and i leave CC forever?

Posted: **Fri Aug 08, 2008 9:13 pm**

No you get tons of warnings. I had a few then a one day timeout. I had a few more since then. But I was banned for some drunken posts, and all my warnings have been for: my avatar or flaming outside fw. Pretty normal stuff. Well, except my avatar, since that isn't really a rule at all.

Posted: **Sat Aug 09, 2008 5:26 pm**

jbrettlip wrote:No you get tons of warnings. I had a few then a one day timeout. I had a few more since then. But I was banned for some drunken posts, and all my warnings have been for: my avatar or flaming outside fw. Pretty normal stuff. Well, except my avatar, since that isn't really a rule at all.

Yes you get tons of warnings, but how are you supposed to know how close you are to a ban. If some people get 5 warnings and then banned and some people get 3 warnings and then banned, how are supposed to know how close we are to getting banned?

This is why we need the ban meter.

Posted: **Sat Aug 09, 2008 5:43 pm**

The PMs from mods or admin will let you know how close you are. If someone says, the next time you are gone, I would assume that you will not be able to read the next PM from an admin. If they say "knock it off" then just stop with that action, there is a large gap between "knock it off" and "bu-bye" with a few PMs in between.

Posted: **Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:48 pm**

The time Lack could spend working on this, would most likely be better spent on something, due a very small number of users would actually seen any benefit from this. Think big, and this wouldn't be it.

--Andy

Posted: **Sat Aug 09, 2008 10:24 pm**

clapper011 wrote:they would know, how could they not? I mean you only get so many chances. It isnt like baseball...where 3 strikes and your gone, you get many chances...

ja, at how many tries it took before norse got himself the permaban

Posted: **Sat Aug 09, 2008 10:34 pm**

AndyDufresne wrote:We actually do take into account when the "last offense" occurred, and also what the current "offense" is. We also take into account their past history of "offense types"--I.E. someone with multiple Oversized Signature Warnings is not the same as someone with multiple Trolling warnings.

Very few people have been Perma-banned from this website in its history--under 10 I believe. And those that have been, have severely and repeatedly disregarded the Rules.

--Andy

we back to my signature warnings... :roll:

and of the 10 banned ... six in the last couple of months?

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 12:22 am**

Thing is, I got shitloads of bans and warnings from wicked ages ago for pretty much absolutely nothing . And you can't work it back. Kinda unfair aint it?

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 8:15 am**

timmytuttut88 wrote:Specifics:
... there needs to be some sort of ban meter. If you get a lot of warnings the meter goes up. If you don't get any warnings for a long time the meter goes down ...

Out of curiosity timmy; is it your intention that the meter would be private only for the users themselves to view or public ?

Regardless I do, as have others, question the benefit for anyone but a 'select' few. And hence from my personal point of view this "suggestion to improve CC" would have to rate as low priority even if I could be dissuaded of my opinion as follows:

Looking at the huge majority of users who are here to have fun and not to test the rules this would seem to be irrelevant. If there are a few who are here who intentionally break the rules or at least "test the edges" it seems to me that a rigid meter is going to be of no use. Whilst I agree that there should be consistency in application of bans good mods/admins also need to use discretion.

In my limited experience I'd say the mods/admins do use their discretion well. If there were a ban meter in place where 0 was the minimum and 10 was the perma-ban mark I'd suggest that users who have been perma-banned have typically reached about 40 when they get banned. Some users may have only reached 30, some may have reached 50. But the point is they were all well over 10 and certainly in no doubt as to why they were being banned. They may not have known just when they were going to be banned "next", but will have certainly been aware that they'd already crossed the line several times and so were on borrowed time. If the CC admin team appear to have been inconsistent it seems me that this is because they have chosen to take a lenient line, always giving people the benefit of the doubt and consequently are very fair on this point.

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 2:15 pm**

Eh, I thought it was a good idea. Shot down in a heart-beat.

Posted: **Sun Aug 10, 2008 2:17 pm**

timmytuttut88 wrote:Eh, I thought it was a good idea. Shot down in a heart-beat.

'tis a good idea

Posted: **Thu Aug 14, 2008 10:27 am**

Why code this when there is a workaround: heeding your warnings and following the rules and forum guidelines. Then you'll never get surprised with a ban!

Posted: **Sat Aug 16, 2008 10:12 am**

lackattack wrote:Why code this when there is a workaround: heeding your warnings and following the rules and forum guidelines. Then you'll never get surprised with a ban!

Great idea Lack- that's why you're the boss. * To- Do *

Posted: **Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:38 pm**

lackattack wrote:Why code this when there is a workaround: heeding your warnings and following the rules and forum guidelines. Then you'll never get surprised with a ban!

actually, I'm pretty sure there is a MOD for a Warning System, that allows the mod to give a warning level (up to 5 per offense) and it would show the user how close they are to being banned

Conquer Club

perma-bans

perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans

Re: perma-bans