Observation On The Server's Ban Policy

[Trips 344]

Hi I'm Trips, maybe you know me, maybe you don't. I've been with the server for a bit past a year now and I thought I'd post a little rant-topic. This could've probably been in the feedback forum, but off-topic is always a safe bet don't you think?

 

Anyways, LotC has changed a lot in a year and a lot of things have happened. Four different maps have cycled within the span of a single year, rules regarding raiding, wars and a load of other things have changed. For example, you can no longer use curse words in the forums, or say blacklisted words in game. What suprises me with the implementation of the blacklist is the words chosen. For example, a*tism is a word on the blacklist, just like numerous nicknames for that mental disorder. Using the word in pretty much any way gets you banned for 30 - 60 minutes. The word itself isn't even offensive, whereas the word ni*ger is. Did I mention that you can call someone a ni*ger on the server and the blacklist doesn't pick it up because it isn't a blacklisted word?

That really makes me wonder, if the staff is pro-racism, or simply finds mental disorders more relevant. In any case, it's quite ironic.

EDIT: apparently the n-word is on the blacklist, but each time i've seen someone use it nothing has happened. (this comes from someone who has been banned twice for saying the 'a-word')

 

Now that gets me in the mood to talk about bans. It is surely a topic that has been discussed over many teamspeak channels and skype groups, and for some unknown reason I decided to bring it here. Do you all think that the system regarding bans is something to take seriously? To me it seems more like a joke. People who repeat breaking the rules after appealing always get unbanned, people who did absolutely nothing are getting banned (and staying so), and people who break the rules get unbanned.. and most certainly people who are liked by the staff get away with anything.

 

Well.. let me give you a prime example of what I am talking about: spiffytaylor411 was banned a little over a week ago for something he didn't do. He broke absolutely no rules and got banned for what, two months because of biased opinions? Practically he was banned for being a protagonist in the story someone else made. After waiting a few days for the dust to settle he made a ban appeal, only to wait a full day to get it looked at, and then get told to wait until friday. His ban appeal was very well thought out and explained the situation quite well.

Therefore his ban was changed from two months to two weeks. Not that outrageous, sounds kind of fair right? 

 

Second example is the beloved leader of Leyulin, Leowarrior14. He got banned yesterday for something that wasn't really all that ban-worthy, yet he still did evidently break the rules; by running through a non-PVP zone. For this he received a ban of a single week, which in itself sounds quite fair, for it is only seven days. Regardless, he didn't exactly post a ban appeal, but  I assume simply by being a known figure with humongous amounts of OOC charisma he got unbanned within a single day, or perhaps some staff member likes him a lot, I don't know. 

 

So now I am wondering how does LotC ban policy exactly work? Is it entirely based of off the mood of the staff, or perhaps it is highly clouded by OOC relations?

Is LotC even trying to cater to the needs of the community, or just doing whatever feels fun at the time. Being the biggest community like this, I think we should set an example for things like this. Get this **** straight already!

 

 

And how in the world are we still not majority default? Majority default always makes over 50% enjoy the battle.

 

Like, actually, what in the world is the staff doing other than each moderating in a way they see fit? When do they listen to the community?

 

 

TL;DR calling staff out for favoritism and not listening to community

 

also gonna mention magic plugin lelelel

[Graf 135]

 

Agreed.

[ski_king3 0]

Don't have time to read all of this, but I guarantee you that the n-word is certainly picked up by the plugin that also picks up the word autism.

 

Source: Was a GM and saw it ping me when used.

 

 

EDIT: Also, it seems like you expect absolute consistency among the staff when it comes to bans. That's impossible, unless every situation is to be accounted for and given objective ban times. However, that's stupid, because we're a small server and in general the judgment of the moderator deciding on the ban is better than some rigid, preset rule. You have expectations that cannot be met and would provide a net negative to the server if they were, if I understand correctly.

[Graf 135]

Don't have time to read all of this, but I guarantee you that the n-word is certainly picked up by the plugin that also picks up the word autism.

 

Source: Was a GM and saw it ping me when used.

 

Whaddup my neighbour?

[Moot 1719]

The server isn't a judicial system, and technically, you can be banned for anything the GMs think should be ban worthy.

[Fireheart 2777]

It's an interesting point because the shift has been more power to GM's to decide rules and how long the ban will take place.

[Trips 344]

Well anyways, I've probably said everything I wanted to say. An absolute consistency when it comes to bans is not what I expect, what I expect is either logic or fairness, preferably a mix. Well, I can understand if such is impossible though, like, innocent people get convicted in 'murica too..

[Merkaken 516]

I'm just going to reply to a few specific things, my appologies if it seems like I'm trying to pick apart your post.

 

"The word itself isn't even offensive, whereas the word ni*ger is"

To you, certainly. But you must understand not everyone thinks the same way. While to you it may not be offensive, to others it most certainly is. In addition, I /highly/ doubt the staff is pro racism, that's a rather silly notion. But I do agree that those words should be blacklisted, same as mental disorders.

 

"Second example is the beloved leader of Leyulin, Leowarrior14. He got banned yesterday for something that wasn't really all that ban-worthy, yet he still did evidently break the rules; by running through a non-PVP zone. For this he received a ban of a single week, which in itself sounds quite fair, for it is only seven days. Regardless, he didn't exactly post a ban appeal, but  I assume simply by being a known figure with humongous amounts of OOC charisma he got unbanned within a single day, or perhaps some staff member likes him a lot, I don't know. "

 

Now this, I will say, does seem like staff bias. I highly doubt it is, but I do agree with you this is crap.

 

Most of your points I agree with, but I'm sure the majority of us don't know how to moderate a huge server like this. I highly doubt the entire staff (certainly a few, I'm not /that/ stupid) are like "Cackle cackle, unban my friends, snicker snicker do whatever I want!". Perhaps just sit back and think "Maybe they're not trying to screw us over". Things could be better, but patience would be best.

 

 

Magic plugin plz

[Lima 774]

This is the issue with a flexible rules system. It allows flexible ban lengths and depending on who bans you, you can expect different results.

This is because, its down to the GM's discretion to if they wish to throw in anything else they wish to observe while banning you and pile it in. I was banned once for plugin abuse identical to Epicbeast, however when this was done there was a 1 week difference in our ban length. He got 1 day I got 1 week.

 

This is because the GM decided to throw in toxicity to my ban for calling PVP upon a cultist, and when they asked for RP I was quoted for saying "No, because your a cultist."

 

I, in the tips plugin abuse said "Dont' get bandited by the undead!", Epicbeast said something along the lines of "Don't kill yourself please."

 

The flexible rules system allows a myriad of OOC relations with the GM and the addition of that GM's OOC buddies to determine your ban length and indeed if your banned.

I don't think that's correct.

 

Magic plugin is biggest waste of time for staff ever and depletes tech team time on useful stuff. Also unbalances PVP.

[Swgrclan 2682]

I personally detest this obscure form of thought policing excused as a tool to prevent "toxicity"; something that advocated a hugbox mentality in this community. While it is not appropriate to yell racial slurs and terms used to describe mental illnesses in public chat, it is also not appropriate to punish players for gibing their friends, in private messages, with questionable vocabulary. Censorship is a poor way of handling a matter better left alone. After all, who can be offended by words they cannot see?

[Guest Guest]

It's been this way and its always going to be this way no matter how hard anyone tries. The best thing to do is learn to adapt to the way things work in a way that allows you to do what you want. 

[DrakeHaze. 2524]

magic plugin was trashed lololol

[Areon 947]

Words themselves aren't offensive.

 

Words become offensive in the context and target they are directed to.

[TornadoWatch 364]

Being offended is scary. I, for one, have a panic attack whenever someone uses bad words near me, or dares speak the name of a common mental disorder. thusly i fully support these Speechrules to keep us all safe and non-offended.

 

what should happen in regards to bans:

 

Objective rules should be set with penalties for the breaking of these rules. It's really not that hard. I think the staff just enjoy some matter of arbitrage.

 

Why is it so hard to say that "X rule deserves Y punishment for Z amount of time?" A real-life judicial system is much more complex. Just because "Oh, every case is different!" doesn't mean you can't assign objective standards and punishments.

 

If someone breaks a certain rule, they should be banned for a certain amount of time as long as they are found guilty of it. Allowing for bans to be completely up to the discretion of staff is asking for bias.

[~ Fiend ~ 611]

GMs are human, too. Humans are biased, humans make mistakes. We're all gonna have to live with that, and if you accept it, it's not so bad,

Also, when someone's ban catalyzes a rule or policy change it has always been the standard to unban them, or not ban them and just post a rule/policy clarification. Though I don't think Leo is unbanned yet?