Conquer Club

owenshooter wrote:and now t-o-m is perma-banned from the entire site... hope they give him back his maps... this is out of control.-0

I miss the logic here. Tom was told not to do something and did it anyways (and more than once). People really need to learn to listen.

stahrgazer wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Offhand, the two ideas I like best are to allow minor infractions to, not quite dissappear completely, but essentially fall off the record, only to be brought back if someone commits a serious offense.

Why bother bringing back a minor offense if someone commits a serious offense? Just deal with the serious offense.

Depends on how serious. I am just saying the records should not be entirely erased.
Maybe I should have said unless there is a new string of petty offenses.

stahrgazer wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:Second, to another escalation beyond permanent. For minor infractions, I can see adding 6 months, then a year. Anything over a year is not much different from a perme-ban anyway.

Why a year for minor infractions? If the offense is minor, the punishment should be minor; escalating, but still minor. Say, day, week, month, six weeks, 3 months for repeated infractions, then if behavior repeats when allowed back, automatically 6 weeks then 3 months; 6 weeks then 3 months; in a cycle. Eventually the person is likely to tire of the game of getting banned.

I was not really addressing that part, I was simply saying that a 6 month, even a year ban could be an option.

stahrgazer wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:This also has a tie-in to the justice system in our country. It definitely has tie-ins to the way most schools, even many families, work places operate. That keeps someone who just constantly breaks the rules (yes, DM probably qualifies)

Few justice systems punish jaywalking or speeding the same way murder or armed robbery is punished, no matter how many times a person jaywalks or speeds; some 3 strikes rules were written to appropriately indicate the less minor crimes as the only ones counting toward 3 strikes.

Perma-bans should be left for those who hack the system, either by electronic sabotage or repeated multi-isms. For people just being offensive, there'd probably be less of that if mods addressed offensiveness across the board, rather than just for those who aren't their pets.

True, but not true.

Have kids? You have rules. They break them, you have to give consequences. But what happens when your eight year old stares you in the face and says "no, I am not going to do that". At that point, its no longer about picking up the clothes or whatever, the problem is the defiance. And either you fix it when the kid is 8 or .. . heaven help you (and the rest of us) later!

You could, potentially, wind up with 15 years jailtime for jaywalking if you leave your tickets go. You would not get 15 years for jaywalking, per se, but you could get it for leaving tickets unpaid for such a long time, ignoring court summons, etc.

This is why I think we have to defer a certain amount of discretion at the hands of the mods. Not every case is going to be applicable to the written rules. That being said, there probably should be a difference between someone getting a harsher punishment for breaking a rule and getting a harsher punishment for annoying or frustrating the mods.

owenshooter wrote: you [clapper] have come to become one of my favorite moderators on this site

Damn, I wish they had a sucking-up smilie.

slowreactor wrote:

owenshooter wrote: you [clapper] have come to become one of my favorite moderators on this site

Damn, I wish they had a sucking-up smilie.

It would also need a little brown nose.

notyou2 wrote:

slowreactor wrote:

owenshooter wrote: you [clapper] have come to become one of my favorite moderators on this site

Damn, I wish they had a sucking-up smilie.

It would also need a little brown nose.

Just take a picture of a baby with brown on its face.

im against permanent ban.
If you ask me i will rather create new limited ban option.
If you doing something very bad,then you get 7 days out of CC, and every time when you cause a problems get 7 day out of CC. I think that this is much fair option,instead permaban. That way you can give people chance to become better,and to start enjoy in games.

squishyg wrote:This is why I think we have to defer a certain amount of discretion at the hands of the mods. Not every case is going to be applicable to the written rules. That being said, there probably should be a difference between someone getting a harsher punishment for breaking a rule and getting a harsher punishment for annoying or frustrating the mods.

That's my basic point... though with the understanding that "frustrating" can escalate to something much more than simply frustrating.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

squishyg wrote:This is why I think we have to defer a certain amount of discretion at the hands of the mods. Not every case is going to be applicable to the written rules. That being said, there probably should be a difference between someone getting a harsher punishment for breaking a rule and getting a harsher punishment for annoying or frustrating the mods.

That's my basic point... though with the understanding that "frustrating" can escalate to something much more than simply frustrating.

True, but if the behavior escalates, than the escalated punishment is warranted (i.e. if trolling turns into abuse or cyber-bullying). If you're always annoying, you shouldn't get harsh punishments for being consistent.

qwert wrote:im against permanent ban.
If you ask me i will rather create new limited ban option.
If you doing something very bad,then you get 7 days out of CC, and every time when you cause a problems get 7 day out of CC. I think that this is much fair option,instead permaban. That way you can give people chance to become better,and to start enjoy in games.

First reasonable suggestion i've heard from the admins here. Is a mapmaker part of the admins? Hmm, probably not if he came up with a good suggestion.


Honibaz

b.k. barunt wrote:

qwert wrote:im against permanent ban.
If you ask me i will rather create new limited ban option.
If you doing something very bad,then you get 7 days out of CC, and every time when you cause a problems get 7 day out of CC. I think that this is much fair option,instead permaban. That way you can give people chance to become better,and to start enjoy in games.

First reasonable suggestion i've heard from the admins here. Is a mapmaker part of the admins? Hmm, probably not if he came up with a good suggestion.

No, qwert is just a mapmaker (one of the best, actually), not part of the mods/admins.

First reasonable suggestion i've heard from the admins here. Is a mapmaker part of the admins? Hmm, probably not if he came up with a good suggestion.


Honibaz

Nope im not admins- but i think that this option will be better instead permaban-except cheaters and multis who will get permanent ban.
In this site you have many children who play games,and need to realised what is wron and what is right,that way,when you give hem a warning,and punish with 7 day limited ban out of CC(this mean out of games,forums,PM,live chat),the person after 7days have chance to fix hes behaviour. I dont understand how admins not reconsider this options.

qwert wrote:

First reasonable suggestion i've heard from the admins here. Is a mapmaker part of the admins? Hmm, probably not if he came up with a good suggestion.


Honibaz

Nope im not admins- but i think that this option will be better instead permaban-except cheaters and multis who will get permanent ban.
In this site you have many children who play games,and need to realised what is wron and what is right,that way,when you give hem a warning,and punish with 7 day limited ban out of CC(this mean out of games,forums,PM,live chat),the person after 7days have chance to fix hes behaviour. I dont understand how admins not reconsider this options.

This is one of my thoughts as well.

Frankly, when one of the older folks steps over the line, it is usually with more reason. We ALL lose our temper now and then. Some more than others. The key is to keep it within reason. Mostly, the only ones I see really and truly cause issues are those who are just popping in briefly to cause issues and those who have gotten ticked off, see a ban coming and decide to "go out with a bang".

I hate to see good ideas like that shuffled off to the side like so much shit, but that's exactly what the admins do and will continue to do. Call me a pessimistic old bastard and you'll be dead on. I've been here 3 years and i've never seen them show enough interest in the membership to give serious thought to any complaints about the forum. I was a pessimistic old bastard when i got here - now i'm at critical mass.


Honibaz

b.k. barunt wrote:I hate to see good ideas like that shuffled off to the side like so much shit, but that's exactly what the admins do and will continue to do. Call me a pessimistic old bastard and you'll be dead on. I've been here 3 years and i've never seen them show enough interest in the membership to give serious thought to any complaints about the forum. I was a pessimistic old bastard when i got here - now i'm at critical mass.


Honibaz

You're a pessimistic old bastard! You're dead right though. Except for Andy who seems genuine to me. He takes things seriously.

Rocket.

This is one of my thoughts as well.

Frankly, when one of the older folks steps over the line, it is usually with more reason. We ALL lose our temper now and then. Some more than others. The key is to keep it within reason. Mostly, the only ones I see really and truly cause issues are those who are just popping in briefly to cause issues and those who have gotten ticked off, see a ban coming and decide to "go out with a bang".

Exactly, some of person who get permaban,its not bad persons,and limited ban can help to people low hes temper. When you upset,you can say some thing who is not good,and then Mod can say
"Ok,i give you 7 day limited ban for this and this,i hope that you will come with clean mind ,and relax-next time you will get 14 days limited ban from CC"

jpcloet wrote:People really need to learn to listen.

That they do, indeed. Although, I suspect it's not just the ones you're referring to.

Timminz wrote:

jpcloet wrote:People really need to learn to listen.

That they do, indeed. Although, I suspect it's not just the ones you're referring to.

I was not referring to anyone, or any group in particular. We all say we can listen, but I've learned through various techniques at work that less than 3% of us really listen. I've learned that it is very difficult to learn, and even harder to teach. The forum goers need to know that people are listening, even if action has not been taken, will not be taken, or will be taken. Do not interpret lack of action to be passive acceptance of the issue. I wish people would worry about themselves and not what others are doing.

jpcloet wrote:

Timminz wrote:

jpcloet wrote:People really need to learn to listen.

That they do, indeed. Although, I suspect it's not just the ones you're referring to.

I was not referring to anyone, or any group in particular. We all say we can listen, but I've learned through various techniques at work that less than 3% of us really listen. I've learned that it is very difficult to learn, and even harder to teach. The forum goers need to know that people are listening, even if action has not been taken, will not be taken, or will be taken. Do not interpret lack of action to be passive acceptance of the issue. I wish people would worry about themselves and not what others are doing.

Well it's easy to say that things are happening behind the scenes, but I think that the only way to satisfy the community would be with visible results. Someone just listening isn't going to bring back Dancing Mustard.

Hey Blunt, we finally agree on something!!

Pardon me?

b.k. barunt wrote:i'm at critical mass.

Oh, I thought you said "I'm a hypocritical ass."


Never mind.

timmytuttut88 wrote:

jpcloet wrote:

Timminz wrote:

jpcloet wrote:People really need to learn to listen.

That they do, indeed. Although, I suspect it's not just the ones you're referring to.

I was not referring to anyone, or any group in particular. We all say we can listen, but I've learned through various techniques at work that less than 3% of us really listen. I've learned that it is very difficult to learn, and even harder to teach. The forum goers need to know that people are listening, even if action has not been taken, will not be taken, or will be taken. Do not interpret lack of action to be passive acceptance of the issue. I wish people would worry about themselves and not what others are doing.

Well it's easy to say that things are happening behind the scenes, but I think that the only way to satisfy the community would be with visible results. Someone just listening isn't going to bring back Dancing Mustard.

This presumes that the goal of the administration is to bring Dancing Mustard back, of course.

Woodruff wrote:

timmytuttut88 wrote:

jpcloet wrote:

Timminz wrote:

jpcloet wrote:People really need to learn to listen.

That they do, indeed. Although, I suspect it's not just the ones you're referring to.

I was not referring to anyone, or any group in particular. We all say we can listen, but I've learned through various techniques at work that less than 3% of us really listen. I've learned that it is very difficult to learn, and even harder to teach. The forum goers need to know that people are listening, even if action has not been taken, will not be taken, or will be taken. Do not interpret lack of action to be passive acceptance of the issue. I wish people would worry about themselves and not what others are doing.

Well it's easy to say that things are happening behind the scenes, but I think that the only way to satisfy the community would be with visible results. Someone just listening isn't going to bring back Dancing Mustard.

This presumes that the goal of the administration is to bring Dancing Mustard back, of course.

I'm not saying that the goal of the administration is to bring back mustard. I'm saying that to satisfy the unrest in the forums we would want to see visible results rather than just be listened too.

timmytuttut88 wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

timmytuttut88 wrote:

jpcloet wrote:

Timminz wrote:That they do, indeed. Although, I suspect it's not just the ones you're referring to.

I was not referring to anyone, or any group in particular. We all say we can listen, but I've learned through various techniques at work that less than 3% of us really listen. I've learned that it is very difficult to learn, and even harder to teach. The forum goers need to know that people are listening, even if action has not been taken, will not be taken, or will be taken. Do not interpret lack of action to be passive acceptance of the issue. I wish people would worry about themselves and not what others are doing.

Well it's easy to say that things are happening behind the scenes, but I think that the only way to satisfy the community would be with visible results. Someone just listening isn't going to bring back Dancing Mustard.

This presumes that the goal of the administration is to bring Dancing Mustard back, of course.

I'm not saying that the goal of the administration is to bring back mustard. I'm saying that to satisfy the unrest in the forums we would want to see visible results rather than just be listened too.

I was referring directly to your last sentence, which was "Someone just listening isn't going to bring back Dancing Mustard.".

Woodruff wrote:

timmytuttut88 wrote:I'm not saying that the goal of the administration is to bring back mustard. I'm saying that to satisfy the unrest in the forums we would want to see visible results rather than just be listened too.

I was referring directly to your last sentence, which was "Someone just listening isn't going to bring back Dancing Mustard.".

The administration can listen to what someone is saying without agreeing with them. By listen I meant "Hear us" rather than "Agree with us".