Poll: Injustice of the Permaban

[Zen Toombs]

Question: is there difference between a ban and a perma-ban? I know that Zeel was banned like a year ago but a few days ago he came back from the dead to troll us some more.

 

[Meatspinner]

Meh, it's fine as is. Better then the forums used to be, at least.

Back in the ye old days you couldn't open a thread without at least seeing one person suspended or banned. Things were rather tense after that (and still are to some extend)

 

[incal11]

Piracy, or any discussion about enabling/admitting to illegal things is banned because we don't want to have to deal with law enforcement and similar issues.

But discussions on why "piracy", for example, should maybe be better tolerated are still allowed, correct?
As long as it's not about admitting/enabling.

(Yes, I will screen grab your positive answer)

 

[kuolonen]

If you cant learn how to discuss with the level of civility that is required on this site, go find your kin the youtube's comment section. Really, it is not so difficult to stick to rules. Breath deep, check your spelling, check your cursing, check the tone, check for ad hominem, then click post.

Also, not getting the hint after 8 warnings is a special kind of thick.

 

[Mr.Pandah]

Meh, it's fine as is. Better then the forums used to be, at least.

Back in the ye old days you couldn't open a thread without at least seeing one person suspended or banned. Things were rather tense after that (and still are to some extend)

What. Since when was that a thing? I've been around since early '08 and I've never seen that time on the Escapist.

 

[Mr.Pandah]

The warning system is alright. The rules suck balls though. Low content? What does that shit even mean? Other places don't got that rule.

Low content posts are posts that consist only of "Lol" or "first" or "oh god" or "this is dumb" or something of that nature. If it's short and adds nothing to the discussion, it counts as low content.

Wait, Vault got banned? What the hell for?

She implied someone was being a crybaby in a post, basically. IMO it was a bit excessive moderation but that happens.

Spoiler: Alternate ban system

I've actually come up with an alternate ban system

The report function will come with text to know what the person is reporting in a thread.

It will use a health bar that goes down, rather than up.
Now here is where it gets tricky.

All users, no matter what, start with 1000 HP. Infractions bring you down. Reach zero, and 6 day ban. Then you get 250 back. Most infractions are worth 100 HP. Minor ones, such as low post, are 50. Major ones, such as OVERT racism/Sexism/homo and herterophobia/anti-theism/anti-atheism/anti-semetism/ whatever esle is worth 500. If you get banned three times, it is permanent.

This gives us something close to the current system without having a low post count be teh equivalent to going "I think all blacks should be slaves".

And no, I do NOT take that quote as my personal belief. That is an example.

Something along those lines could be cool, but the 8 warning system seems good. The only thing that needs work (at least in my opinion) is being more consistent. But I know Kross and co. are doing their best to do the right things, so I can forgive them for their trespasses.

Okay, props for that, but the appeal system doesn't work if you're all still riled. You have to decide to discuss it with a cool head yourselves. I know what goes on in an appeal. I've been there for warnings. Sometimes, you guys agree and sometimes you stick with your guns so tight and fast that I'm sure super glue was involved. There's a big difference between other people saying you might be wrong and deciding so yourself, because we both know the first response to other people, especially if they've been banned.

You. I like you. Keep on talking sense!

She didn't really imply it...so much as flat out say it. Not entirely sure why everyone loved her so much.

 

[Susan Arendt]

Question: is there difference between a ban and a perma-ban? I know that Zeel was banned like a year ago but a few days ago he came back from the dead to troll us some more.

Yep! There are different levels to moderation. There's a warning, which is a "hey, buddy, you did this thing and it wasn't a good idea, but you maybe didn't mean it, so this is just a heads up not to do it again." You can still use the forum as usual, you've just been informed that your actions aren't appreciated. After you rack up a few of those, you get banned, which temporarily cuts off your ability to post in the forums. The length of ban increases as you go up the moderation meter. The final ban is permanent.

 

[Kross]

Piracy, or any discussion about enabling/admitting to illegal things is banned because we don't want to have to deal with law enforcement and similar issues.

But discussions on why "piracy", for example, should maybe be better tolerated are still allowed, correct?
As long as it's not about admitting/enabling.

(Yes, I will screen grab your positive answer)

Yeah, you can discuss concepts/etc, you just can't aid or admit to doing illegal things. Many people seem to find that line extremely difficult to respect, and slide towards things like "I just 'backed up' my files with Napster *wink wink*" (admitting/aiding back when Napster was a thing) or "The following programs all have no legitimate use: *proceeds to list a bunch of programs that make pirating easy*" (aiding)

None of us are really fans of filtering conversations of any sort (outside of keeping things readable), but some things just won't fly in this environment. Things like piracy are due to legal repercussions and such, but even rules like low content are present more because of the scale of a forum environment (a few one word posts in a 10 page thread are no problem, a few dozen are irritating to readers, a few hundred mean people won't even read the thread).

 

[Olas]

I don't have any qualms with the number of warnings or permaban limit. I just don't like how there's a time limit for when your warnings decrease. I means people who post more often are more likely to get banned purely on the fact that they post more. It's like they're being punished for being a frequent escapist poster. I've mentioned this on another thread and I'll say it here too, it should be a certain number of posts, not a time period, that you have to reach without a warning before you can get one dropped. 6 months seems like a long time anyway.

I also think penalties for things like low content posts should be counted differently than those for worse things like insults or harassment. I don't consider these to be equal at all.

Low content posts are always incredibly innocent and accidental, how about instead of immediately issuing a warning for them users instead get sent a message telling them to either lengthen the post or delete it, and if they don't do either within a certain amount of time THEN give them the warning.

 

[Zen Toombs]

Question: is there difference between a ban and a perma-ban? I know that Zeel was banned like a year ago but a few days ago he came back from the dead to troll us some more.

Yep! There are different levels to moderation. There's a warning, which is a "hey, buddy, you did this thing and it wasn't a good idea, but you maybe didn't mean it, so this is just a heads up not to do it again." You can still use the forum as usual, you've just been informed that your actions aren't appreciated. After you rack up a few of those, you get banned, which temporarily cuts off your ability to post in the forums. The length of ban increases as you go up the moderation meter. The final ban is permanent.

Then how did Zeel come back after a year? I do understand the warning meter, but I'm confused why (for example) Zeel was banned a year or so ago but recently he came back, trolololololed a bit, and then got "permabanned" or something. Thank you for your clarification.

 

[Susan Arendt]

Question: is there difference between a ban and a perma-ban? I know that Zeel was banned like a year ago but a few days ago he came back from the dead to troll us some more.

Yep! There are different levels to moderation. There's a warning, which is a "hey, buddy, you did this thing and it wasn't a good idea, but you maybe didn't mean it, so this is just a heads up not to do it again." You can still use the forum as usual, you've just been informed that your actions aren't appreciated. After you rack up a few of those, you get banned, which temporarily cuts off your ability to post in the forums. The length of ban increases as you go up the moderation meter. The final ban is permanent.

Then how did Zeel come back after a year? I do understand the warning meter, but I'm confused why (for example) Zeel was banned a year or so ago but recently he came back, trolololololed a bit, and then got "permabanned" or something. Thank you for your clarification.

In Zeel's case, there was some debate as to the final ban - there were some claims that couldn't be proven one way or the other - so Nasrin decided to give him an opportunity to redeem himself. If he waited a year and asked to come back, she'd allow it. He did, she did, and he blew it pretty much immediately.

 

[blackrave]

I've actually come up with an alternate ban system

The report function will come with text to know what the person is reporting in a thread.

It will use a health bar that goes down, rather than up.
Now here is where it gets tricky.

All users, no matter what, start with 1000 HP. Infractions bring you down. Reach zero, and 6 day ban. Then you get 250 back. Most infractions are worth 100 HP. Minor ones, such as low post, are 50. Major ones, such as OVERT racism/Sexism/homo and herterophobia/anti-theism/anti-atheism/anti-semetism/ whatever esle is worth 500. If you get banned three times, it is permanent.

This gives us something close to the current system without having a low post count be teh equivalent to going "I think all blacks should be slaves".

And no, I do NOT take that quote as my personal belief. That is an example.

That's actually seems really good.
Although I MUST ask- Why 1000?
The standard is 100 (as 100% )
Are you being rebel?

 

[karamazovnew]

snip

That's actually seems really good.
Although I MUST ask- Why 1000?
The standard is 100 (as 100% )
Are you being rebel?

I also like it. But I'd add a way to heal yourself. You get points for the posts you don't get any infractions for, with a min comment limit and a max limit per month. Say 50 comments trigger a heal of 250hp, but not more than once per month. An active poster would reheal completely in 3 months, while a person who doesn't post anyway will take more time, but that doesn't affect him much. Once you reheal completely, your last ban is forgiven, so even if you had 2 bans, you go back to 1 and are allowed one more again. Rinse and repeat.

 

[Meatspinner]

Meh, it's fine as is. Better then the forums used to be, at least.

Back in the ye old days you couldn't open a thread without at least seeing one person suspended or banned. Things were rather tense after that (and still are to some extend)

What. Since when was that a thing? I've been around since early '08 and I've never seen that time on the Escapist.

Few months before Adblockgate I believe. Doesn't really matter now, the forums have changed so much since then

 

[V da Mighty Taco]

*Snip*

Negative press is still press right? I'm pretty sure that piracy scares them more than internet celebrities. This is a very weak argument from my side on this since I can't comprehend much of publishers thought processes so I'll leave that side of it.

From another point of view the lack of moderation on piracy could be mistaken for support of it which may cause a variety of problems. I still believe that if an ad company looks at a site to buy ad space and sees a complete lack of effort by the site to suppress topics around piracy, specifically the how and where, then they just won't buy the space for fear of their own game coming up in those topics.

As for topics that have piracy come up as a topic for how it affects the industry, there have been several that come up in the news like this http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/122054-Anodyne-Developer-Turns-Piracy-Into-PR . You just can't advocate or link to pirate sites based on the Code of Conduct. That's not much of a loss, is it?

That's the thing though - one cannot have a valid discussion if only one side of the argument is allowed to be heard, and acknowledging the other side's points is Debate 101. The rules as they are completely forbid any discussion on the subject unless it's entirely anti-piracy and doesn't acknowledge any counter-points, which undermines the entirely point (and validity) of a discussion in the first place.

Piracy, or any discussion about enabling/admitting to illegal things is banned because we don't want to have to deal with law enforcement and similar issues.

This avatar is temporary until I find a decent animated one again.

Okay, you have a very good point there and for some reason I didn't think of that. I can see why admitting to piracy or helping people pirate would be bannable. However, I still disagree about not allowing pro-piracy arguments at all, as simply agreeing with it or acknowledging why other people might do it is most definitely not a crime and any legal action taken against that would be a massive violation of free speech, which I'm fairly certain this site strongly supports if I recall the SOPA outcry correctly. Considering just how many things piracy and the war on it affects in the not only the gaming industry (particularly how many anti-consumer practices are directly tied to piracy), but to the world at large (once again, SOPA and every other speech / internet limiting bill out there); I do believe that civil discussion on the subject should be allowed so long as people aren't admitting to pirating or teaching others how to do it, due to the legal reasons you mentioned.

 

[Sassafrass]

She didn't really imply it...so much as flat out say it. Not entirely sure why everyone loved her so much.

Nice user who didn't mince their words + High post count + Funny posts = Popular and loved user.
That's how it works around here.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

She didn't really imply it...so much as flat out say it. Not entirely sure why everyone loved her so much.

Nice user who didn't mince their words + High post count + Funny posts = Popular and loved user.
That's how it works around here.

Must explain why nobody knows who you are

[sub]I love my Sassyfrass.[/sub]

 

[V da Mighty Taco]

The warning system is alright. The rules suck balls though. Low content? What does that shit even mean? Other places don't got that rule.

Low content posts are posts that consist only of "Lol" or "first" or "oh god" or "this is dumb" or something of that nature. If it's short and adds nothing to the discussion, it counts as low content.

Wait, Vault got banned? What the hell for?

She implied someone was being a crybaby in a post, basically. IMO it was a bit excessive moderation but that happens.

Spoiler: Alternate ban system

I've actually come up with an alternate ban system

The report function will come with text to know what the person is reporting in a thread.

It will use a health bar that goes down, rather than up.
Now here is where it gets tricky.

All users, no matter what, start with 1000 HP. Infractions bring you down. Reach zero, and 6 day ban. Then you get 250 back. Most infractions are worth 100 HP. Minor ones, such as low post, are 50. Major ones, such as OVERT racism/Sexism/homo and herterophobia/anti-theism/anti-atheism/anti-semetism/ whatever esle is worth 500. If you get banned three times, it is permanent.

This gives us something close to the current system without having a low post count be teh equivalent to going "I think all blacks should be slaves".

And no, I do NOT take that quote as my personal belief. That is an example.

Something along those lines could be cool, but the 8 warning system seems good. The only thing that needs work (at least in my opinion) is being more consistent. But I know Kross and co. are doing their best to do the right things, so I can forgive them for their trespasses.

Okay, props for that, but the appeal system doesn't work if you're all still riled. You have to decide to discuss it with a cool head yourselves. I know what goes on in an appeal. I've been there for warnings. Sometimes, you guys agree and sometimes you stick with your guns so tight and fast that I'm sure super glue was involved. There's a big difference between other people saying you might be wrong and deciding so yourself, because we both know the first response to other people, especially if they've been banned.

You. I like you. Keep on talking sense!

She didn't really imply it...so much as flat out say it. Not entirely sure why everyone loved her so much.

I can't say I cared about her much, but I do feel that the banning post was fairly polite and even the person her post was directed to didn't consider it offensive at all, hence why I don't think it was worth a permaban or even a warning.

EDIT: Basically, I view Vault's post in the same light as Daystar's post above - an attempt at humor with no malicious intent involved and with both parties fully aware of that; thus, it doesn't warrant punishment at all imo.

Captcha: "I know nothing!"

 

[Sassafrass]

She didn't really imply it...so much as flat out say it. Not entirely sure why everyone loved her so much.

Nice user who didn't mince their words + High post count + Funny posts = Popular and loved user.
That's how it works around here.

Must explain why nobody knows who you are

[sub]I love my Sassyfrass.[/sub]

You know how to cut a man deep, Daystar.
You cut me deep into my pit of emotions. D:

 

[Daystar Clarion]

She didn't really imply it...so much as flat out say it. Not entirely sure why everyone loved her so much.

Nice user who didn't mince their words + High post count + Funny posts = Popular and loved user.
That's how it works around here.

Must explain why nobody knows who you are

[sub]I love my Sassyfrass.[/sub]

You know how to cut a man deep, Daystar.
You cut me deep into my pit of emotions. D:

The feels?

Oh god...

Keep that hair short...