Ban Offences and Times

[BrotherMols]

Further to my post on a different thread.

I do not think that ban requests and appeals are being applied evenly across the board. I have seen what is the same offence get bans ranging from 24 hours to 7 days. I have resisted posting about it until now, as last time I contributed to a thread, I started getting hate messages on bnet.

I believe there should be a list of Offences and how long the offender should be banned for, something like this (ignore the times, they are just examples):


Offence // First Offence // Second Offence // Third Offence
Maphack // 1 year // Lifetime
Game ruining // 1 week // 1 month // 1 year
Excessive afk // 1 day //
Excessive flaming // 1 day // 1 week // 1 month

This is just an example, and the ban times would be for admins to decide.

I feel this would be a fairer way to apply bans, as at the moment, with the multiple mods needed to apply bans - there is too much difference in punishments.

I also feel ban appeals should only be granted if a mistake was made with the original ban. With the possibility of halfing the punishment, if genuine remorse is shown on say a first offender.

Thoughts?

[Palsgraf]

We have guidelines posted in admin section of forum. In addition, not every case is the same- even if they are both first offenses.

I believe in publishing the guidelines for the public to see and requiring mods explain why they diverged from those guidelines, but I'm not in favor of forcing mods to abide by them.

[BrotherMols]

In theory, taking case by case is a good idea, but the fact is I dont believe the rules are being applied evenly across the board.

Don't get me wrong I think it is great that you have given us the ability to request and appeal bans in a fair manner, but I am worried about the wide variety of ban lengths for what are extremely similar offences.

As for Ban Appeals, are there guidelines for when it is appropriate to overturn a ban? In my eyes, the only time a ban should be completely removed is when an error has happened in a ban request - otherwise what is the point in taking the effort to make a Ban request, and for it to be successful, only to have it overturned instantly for someone just saying sorry!

I am using this as an example - I have nothing against anyone here:

Ban request is approved :- viewtopic.php?f=24&t=7339

29 minutes later, Ban appeal is approved: viewtopic.php?f=25&t=7345

In a court of law, when a person admits guilt and apologises (like beep has done), their sentence is REDUCED (not abolished). This is how an appeal system should work. So in my eyes, his ban should have been reduced by say half (or whatever the admin guidelines say).

[Palsgraf]

In a court of law, when a person admits guilt and apologises (like beep has done), their sentence is REDUCED (not abolished). This is how an appeal system should work. So in my eyes, his ban should have been reduced by say half (or whatever the admin guidelines say).

You've never heard of a commuted sentence?

Bans serve two purposes: 1) to keep the bad apples out; 2) to educate players and encourage them to follow the rules.

Thus, if a person comes onto the forum and makes an appeal, and demonstrates remorse and an understanding of the rules, a ban will be lifted. Again, it depends on the extent of the initial offense and his ban history. If he shows he never learned anything, or if we feel that a ban is necessary for the lesson to really sink in, we will not lift the ban.

Let me just say that I personally agree that a ban should rarely be lifted in its entirety (except, of course, autobans or when a person has already served a substantial portion of the ban).

[BrotherMols]

In a court of law, when a person admits guilt and apologises (like beep has done), their sentence is REDUCED (not abolished). This is how an appeal system should work. So in my eyes, his ban should have been reduced by say half (or whatever the admin guidelines say).

You've never heard of a commuted sentence?

Bans serve two purposes: 1) to keep the bad apples out; 2) to educate players and encourage them to follow the rules.

Thus, if a person comes onto the forum and makes an appeal, and demonstrates remorse and an understanding of the rules, a ban will be lifted. Again, it depends on the extent of the initial offense and his ban history. If he shows he never learned anything, or if we feel that a ban is necessary for the lesson to really sink in, we will not lift the ban.

Let me just say that I personally agree that a ban should rarely be lifted in its entirety (except, of course, autobans or when a person has already served a substantial portion of the ban).

To be honest, my law example wasn't foolproof - although a commuted sentence involves a reduction in sentence in the vast majority of cases - usually leaving a suspended sentence or community service - depending on a bazillion factors which isn't really viable in our case. The only real way to commute a sentence in our case (that I can think of) would be a ban time reduction.

I am all for, bans being reduced for someone admitting guilt and showing remorse - mainly because it saves everyone alot of hassle - but like you said, I am not in favour of a complete pardon, it defeats the point of someone taking all the effort to make a request. I can understand it with the autobans, as they can be a bit harsh at times.

[uakf.b]

but like you said, I am not in favour of a complete pardon, it defeats the point of someone taking all the effort to make a request.

The point of a ban isn't to appease the person making the ban request, it's to remove abusive players from our game. So unbanning players when they appeal doesn't defeat any point, if they are a repeat offender then probably their appeal won't be accepted.

Edit: closer to the original topic, I don't see two moderators giving two different ban times as a problem. If the offender hadn't done anything wrong, then they wouldn't have gotten banned in the first place. And with either ban time the offender gets banned/punished, but not banned excessively; because with each offense there is a range for the ban duration that has to be decided on a case by case basis. If it falls outside the range then we can tell whoever banned them to ban shorter/longer in the future (and accept appeal/complaint)

[BrotherMols]

but like you said, I am not in favour of a complete pardon, it defeats the point of someone taking all the effort to make a request.

The point of a ban isn't to appease the person making the ban request, it's to remove abusive players from our game. So unbanning players when they appeal doesn't defeat any point, if they are a repeat offender then probably their appeal won't be accepted.

Edit: closer to the original topic, I don't see two moderators giving two different ban times as a problem. If the offender hadn't done anything wrong, then they wouldn't have gotten banned in the first place. And with either ban time the offender gets banned/punished, but not banned excessively; because with each offense there is a range for the ban duration that has to be decided on a case by case basis. If it falls outside the range then we can tell whoever banned them to ban shorter/longer in the future (and accept appeal/complaint)

But why would I bother to report someone, if all it takes for them to get unbanned is them to take 20 seconds to copy paste the appeal format and claim they are sorry - when in fact, they are only sorry that they got caught.

What is your opinion on my point that appeals should never result in the ban being removed completely, unless a mistake was made with the original request handling? To me it just seems ridiculous - they have been found guilty - yet their punishment is quashed completely!

Do you not agree that an appeal based upon admission of guilt and (supposedly) showing remorse should at best result in a reduction in time, even then only if it was a first offence and an admin deemed their apology to be genuine?

[uakf.b]

They've already been punished by having to post an appeal and for the time between them being banned and their appeal getting processed. So in effect it _is_ a reduction in time.

[BrotherMols]

In my example, 29 minutes, that is hardly a punishment.

And begs the question, why was it handled so quickly?

Because they are leaders in the same clan, that is why. Not bad is it when you can just get your clan chieftain to remove your ban instantly, no questions asked. Not very impartial is it?

Which brings me back to my point, that bans and appeals are not being applied evenly across the board - with those having loads of friends and being top of the ELO board getting preferential treatment.

[Palsgraf]

As I said above, one of the goals of the ban system is to educate users of and encourage adherence to the rules. In your example, the person apologized and promised not to do it again. If he is caught breaking a rule a second time, you can be sure his ban will not be lifted bc he is now on notice.

Bans history is recorded, and every admin and mod is supposed to look at that history when making a ban or appeal decision. If a mod is caught unbanning his friends for the mere fact that they are friends, that mod will be censured, suspended or removed.