Public IG bans with some tweaks

The rest of my post explained this but there is no evidence that players are learning the rules via seeing the bans in chat. In fact I would say that there are less bans (just going off of memory here) being given out now than there were when bans were public; part of that may be because having the bans public is a way for the person breaking rules to get attention - with the bans private, they don't get that attention.

people who are applying for staff should know the rules...not sure what you're try to get at there. and they learn the bans and such on the job, it's not an issue

your last point, makes sense and all but there are very few to no complaints about if we do our job when this type of case comes. You can infer that the player either left or they were banned, then you just go along with your day. People aren't leaving because staff isn't doing their job just because they can't see it. I'm only making this assumption because personally I have never recieved such a complaint or heard this criticism. So to answer your question - I would say when the player, who is in this case advertising, leaves they forget about it.

 

...which is why the player name is not mentioned in the public ban message. It literally says "a player" no attention is given to the person that is banned because it is anonymous.

How do these people learn then? Just one day they receive enlightenment from the air? Applicants need to learn from actual staff members how actual rule breaking instances are handled and duration of punishments.

The only reason that has been addressed here not to add it back in is that it is supposedly going to take so much work to have it done, which in itself is a pretty poor reason.

 

Okay I can see why the blanking of the names would be useful here(sorry I kind of went on a tangent and forgot about the actual suggestion lol)

We don't expect applicants to come in knowing all the punishments and what to do for certain offences...we do training and make sure they know what they are doing before they do it. It's obviously not 100% fullproof but hey everyone makes mistakes.

No one said it takes so much work, it's just that it does take work to implement it when the reasons for having it are so weak. So from a business standpoint it makes sense to leave it as-is.

 

In my opinion, I really like how the system is right now. I wouldn't like to see someone getting banned in public and then everyone saying "gg" "rekt" "haha" This could offend the person who was banned. Some people want to keep their bans private and not let the whole community know.
-1.

 

The reason I think bans should remain private is because of a few reasons. Mainly there should not ever be a pretense that the customers should be overseeing the workers. It's simply not your place, and any reason of "To see the staff are banning people" are null and void because it's not a player's place. They are here to play, not to monitor staff.

Additionally, reading the rules should be maintained as the ultimate point. Did you log in, advertise, and then get banned because you didn't read the rules? That is nobodies fault but your own. If we want to disseminate rules more efficiently ingame, then a GUI menu should be implemented with the links to forums and a rundown on all major rules, it can even be put in the existing /help menu.

Learning timeframes of ban so you can be staff in the future is also a bogus reason, as bans should resonate from exercising common sense on the situation, rather than referencing an arbitrary time that has no nuance. Relying on ban times, in my experience, has only resulted in mechanical banning with no fore-thought.

Essentially verbal warnings, which already exist, serve the very purpose a public ban would. It tells people to knock this action off.

--- Double Post Merged, May 5, 2016, Original Post Date: May 5, 2016 ---

I have never once come across a new player and been told "Hey I appreciate the existing rules and how you enforce them". From my experience, I would suspect new players are more interesting in learning how to play, and then playing. They don't care why or who someone is banned for.

Additionally, and most importantly, the very fact this would lead a number of people to instantly shout after a ban

"Why did you ban for X time, it shoulda been Y!!"

 

If you commit the crime, you should be ready to receive the punishment (the ban plus any loss of your reputation that results).

From my experience, the opposite has been true. New players often see that rules aren't (to them, at least, since private bans aren't too common) being enforced due to the lack of a ban message. I can also see scenarios that where new players don't see ban messages, think that rules aren't being enforced, and subsequently break rules, because they think they can get away with rulebreaking.

Yet, there exists a comprehensive list of banning rules on the staff forums, with very specific instructions on ban lengths. The current system is set up so that ban lengths would have consistency between players and remove (to the best of its abilities) staff bias. Would you therefore suggest that be changed as well (not a rhetorical question, as I might support that)?

Yet verbal warnings are only for spam or caps evasion. In more extreme cases like advertising, or non-chat related offenses, no verbal warning is given.

This is the biggest minus for me. I'd say that the deterrent of public banning is worth the annoying spam, but I'll respect you if you think differently.

--- Double Post Merged, May 5, 2016, Original Post Date: May 5, 2016 ---

Personally, I think that we should fix a broken system because it's broken, not because nobody has complained about it.

 

So much for being within the EULA, huh? Minecraft communities aren't businesses. You're not an investor. Staff are volunteers. Gaming communities aren't about how much profit they make.

 

It is a business
I am a customer
Staff volunteer to do a job
All business is profit driven

It is true this is a game to players, but there is a staff team who do real actual work to keep things running. There is revenue, and bills to be paid. There is a profit to reinvest, this is a business in actuality.

I just view this situation similar to me going into a local gas station every day for gas and a few drinks. Even though I would be a valued customer and my opinion would be taken above other non-regular customers, for example if I suggested a drink they should carry because I like it, or a bad experience with a certain cashier, I am still a customer and have no right to expect any insight into who they hire for what reason, how they train their workers, or anything else in that manner.

The issue I see is this leads into an area where I personally think players should not be in. Players should not think they are there to make sure staff is banning, which there is a section that would. It's also not for players to question a staff's ban time, which this would doubtlessly begin again almost instantly.

If the goal is to help disseminate rules then there are other ways to do this that are not tied into server affairs. My personal thought on it is just that players, generally not the older ones, view seeing people banned as entertainment, and thus all arguments are actually masking the simple truth, they think it's funny when someone gets banned.

tldr: I think bans should remain private and there are more positive and productive ways to achieve the heart of this suggestion, to better associate punishment with rulebreaking to act as a deterrent.

 

-1 Bans are just simply private info. No need to have the public knowing these things.

P.S. If you need to know why someone was banned, just ask them yourself.

 

Can we at least have some information about when a player's ban will expire in /seen? Or at the very minimum whether the ban is temp or perm? This way people can know if they are going to be seeing certain players again or if they are gone for good.

For some people, the only contact that they have with other players is in game, so they cannot ask them why/how long they were banned while they are banned.

 

I don't know if you realize this, but you joined when bans were private information. A year and a half ago, they weren't.

What makes them private information now?

 

Staff base that the bans and such are private info because it is not necessary that we, the citizens, know about everything.
And that we make such a big deal about things like their friends being banned, kicked, whatever, or that we complain that the time be longer. Because let's be honest, some of us aren't so cooperative with the staff team.

 

No

And here is why, staff do not want players judging bans, staff do not want players seeing bans, staff do not want players to police the server. If you want to be part of the processes which removes unwanted players than apply for staff.

 

How would showing anonymous ban notices in chat lead to people "policing" the server?

--- Double Post Merged, Dec 31, 1969 ---

I suppose criminal records should be private too?
No need to have the public knowing if you've stolen a car, or shot someone right?
That's just simply private info.

 

+1 for that reason

 

Denied, reasons stated above...