[Rules] Allow permabanned members to appeal

[Army of GOD]

Concise description:

• Let members who were banned permanently and/or for six months have a chance to appeal their bans through an e-ticket

Specifics/Details:

• It is unfair that the max banishment has been reduced to 3 months, therefore users who have been banned permanently or for six months before the max ban was reduced should have the opportunity to appeal. If Team CC doesn't think their ban should be reduced or lifted, then no action is required. But at least allow the opportunity for an appeal.

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

• This is a user-active suggestion. Team CC doesn't have to go through EVERY SINGLE case. Only the cases that are being appealed through e-tickets
• Greatly better CC/member relations

[Army of GOD]

And yes, I fully realize that if this suggestion gets support and is moved to the submitted sub-form, it'll be around 3-4 years until it is implemented.

[BigBallinStalin]

I'll volunteer to organize a committee to assess appeals, fine tune them, gather full information, and present the case to the mods in a concise yet informative format.

This will lower their costs associated with approving this proposal.

[Metsfanmax]

This would make sense if and only if the staff agreed that the system was previously unfair and they are correcting an injustice. But if the change was simply to adapt to a new culture in the community, then the old punishments made sense in the context of the CC community as it was in the past, so retroactively changing punishments doesn't make sense.

[BigBallinStalin]

This would make sense if and only if the staff agreed that the system was previously unfair and they are correcting an injustice. But if the change was simply to adapt to a new culture in the community, then the old punishments made sense in the context of the CC community as it was in the past, so retroactively changing punishments doesn't make sense.

Why should that discretion to be left to the staff?

Previously, the discretion wasn't left to the staff on the 3-month rule, because the CC members pushed for it via their own discretion...

Why are you arbitrarily changing the scenario?

[Army of GOD]

This would make sense if and only if the staff agreed that the system was previously unfair and they are correcting an injustice. But if the change was simply to adapt to a new culture in the community, then the old punishments made sense in the context of the CC community as it was in the past, so retroactively changing punishments doesn't make sense.

Why should that discretion to be left to the staff?

Previously, the discretion wasn't left to the staff on the 3-month rule, because the CC members pushed for it via their own discretion...

Why are you arbitrarily changing the scenario?[/quote]

Well, it's ultimately left to the staff because they're the all-powerful decision makers here.

Though, I agree. Hopefully the staff has the sense to follow the requests of its members, even if they do think the bans were fair. If a large majority of users were to be in favor of this and the staff just sits there with their arms crossed, there will be a (bigger) rift which isn't good for a currently declining website.

[clapper011]

this could possibly work..if the banned/"returnie" would be under close supervision...and promise to behave, follow rules and guidelines etc. and If they crossed the line..... gone again... be like a second chance.. IF it were approved... I think it would ultimately be up to admin and the all "powerful" owner of this site. Just my 2 cents on this subject and not that of other "staff" members.



clappy

[Victor Sullivan]

I like it. Clapper expresses my sentiments quite closely.

-Sully

[jefjef]

this could possibly work..if the banned/"returnie" would be under close supervision...and promise to behave, follow rules and guidelines etc. and If they crossed the line..... gone again... be like a second chance..

Those that come back from an extended forum ban, like when general Stoneham came back, were/are always under very close supervision. I seem to recall Andy following almost every single General post with one of his own.

But yes. In all fairness and good business why not have an appeal system. One that may actually be productive and not just one for show.

[clapper011]

this could possibly work..if the banned/"returnie" would be under close supervision...and promise to behave, follow rules and guidelines etc. and If they crossed the line..... gone again... be like a second chance..

Those that come back from an extended forum ban, like when general Stoneham came back, were/are always under very close supervision. I seem to recall Andy following almost every single General post with one of his own.

But yes. In all fairness and good business why not have an appeal system. One that may actually be productive and not just one for show.

Yes..u will always get those that don't care or can't follow the rules after coming back..but why should 1 person ruin the chances for those that are sincere in wanting to return? A lesson finnaly learned if you will!... But again...only my opinion not that of anyone else mod or like.....


Clappy

[Army of GOD]

poll added

[Victor Sullivan]

"We, the jury, find the user...not guilty of trolling in the first degree."

-Sully

[squishyg]

This seems quite fair. Does anyone know how many users this would even affect?

[TeeGee]

Theoretically if these users are allowed back onto the site and allowed to post in the forums they could be placed in a special category where their posts need to be approved by a moderator before being displayed.

Overall I like the idea

[Army of GOD]

People who are voting no, are you gonna stay in the shadows and not say why you voted no?

[grifftron]

People who are voting no, are you gonna stay in the shadows and not say why you voted no?

I voted "I dunno lol".. because this is a friggen game site, not like a went shopping at a store and was blamed for stealing a butterfinger bar... because I would appeal that!

Imma go back in the shadows now

-griff

[Qwert]

Army of GOD on Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:42 am

And yes, I fully realize that if this suggestion gets support and is moved to the submitted sub-form, it'll be around 3-4 years until it is implemented.

Good that you notice,these mean if someone ban today,need to waith 4 years to put appeal(ofocurse if these been acepted.

Well these sugestion depend on only one people oppinion, because you can have 100% support,lack can come here and say,"in your dream these will hepend", but lets pretend that lack say "Ok, i will implement that", then you will have second problem, what if MOd who permaban person,again need to read appeal,and to decide if he make "Mistake" and you know how for mods are very hard to say "i make mistake,sorry for you been innocent" . Also if you create separate commision who will check appeal, then you can have problem because Mods who kick player will be in bad relations with mods who will move people back,declare that these and these mod are made mistakes, and ban players without enough evidences.

[notyou2]

I this initiative.

[Metsfanmax]

qwert, this has nothing to do with a particular mod making a mistake in banning someone. If an actual mistake was made handing out someone's decision in the past, then that should be corrected regardless of whether the six-month bans stay or go. If that was the correct decision at the time, in the sense that the community guidelines made it evident that a six-month ban was the next appropriate step of punishment for that user, then the only issue here is whether the community guidelines never should have been that way. That has nothing to do with the choices of an individual staff member but rather the culture of the community as a whole.

By the way, I'm still not sure of the logical connection between giving site-banned players a chance to appeal and a lack of six month bans. There's a huge philosophical difference between a definite length of time ban and an indefinite one.

[Army of GOD]

There's a huge philosophical difference between a definite length of time ban and an indefinite one.

I guess, but they're similar in the idea that they were both, at separate times, the "maximum" ban. First permabans were the max bans and then CC reduced it to 6 months. I'm not sure if CC thought it was unfair and that's why they reduced it, but if it's unfair that permabans were handed it, then it's equally unfair that six month bans were handed out as well.

[squishyg]

This seems quite fair. Does anyone know how many users this would even affect?

I'm bumping my question. I can only think of 2, maybe 3 perma-banned users. How many are there actually?

[rdsrds2120]

For the same reason we occasionally have cases relooked into in the C&A forum, I support this idea as long as only permabanned people can appeal. Otherwise, there would be a lot of people trying to appeal even the minor things.

If the system was structured correctly, this could be a really nice gesture from the site to the community.

-rd

[rdsrds2120]

This seems quite fair. Does anyone know how many users this would even affect?

I'm bumping my question. I can only think of 2, maybe 3 perma-banned users. How many are there actually?

I'd say there are about 30 that aren't spam/advertisers or multi's.

-rd

[Army of GOD]

For the same reason we occasionally have cases relooked into in the C&A forum, I support this idea as long as only permabanned people can appeal. Otherwise, there would be a lot of people trying to appeal even the minor things.

If the system was structured correctly, this could be a really nice gesture from the site to the community.

-rd

So you don't think 6 monthers should be able to appeal?

[BigBallinStalin]

Army of GOD on Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:42 am

And yes, I fully realize that if this suggestion gets support and is moved to the submitted sub-form, it'll be around 3-4 years until it is implemented.

Good that you notice,these mean if someone ban today,need to waith 4 years to put appeal(ofocurse if these been acepted.

Well these sugestion depend on only one people oppinion, because you can have 100% support,lack can come here and say,"in your dream these will hepend", but lets pretend that lack say "Ok, i will implement that", then you will have second problem, what if MOd who permaban person,again need to read appeal,and to decide if he make "Mistake" and you know how for mods are very hard to say "i make mistake,sorry for you been innocent" . Also if you create separate commision who will check appeal, then you can have problem because Mods who kick player will be in bad relations with mods who will move people back,declare that these and these mod are made mistakes, and ban players without enough evidences.

It seems that your living in Serbia over the years has undermined your faith in authority and its sincerity.