For Minor Infractions, 6 Months Max Vacation instead Perma

[GENERAL STONEHAM]

6 month ban is a horrible punishment let alone a 3o day ban, especially considering the perma-bans being handed out for minor and yes repeated ones at that.

Paying members should receive no more than a 1 month ban, unless it has to do with a REAL CRIME such as racism. Criticizing or a simple flaming of a Moderator or one of their thin-skinned supporters is considered to be capital offense right now and that's silly.

Right now, the Moderators know the likely and usual suspects [repeat offenders] and always keep an eye on them to issue out harsh punishments.

What's wrong with a 30 day ban for repeat offenders? That will silence them into submission. My God, one wrong step and it's back to the 30 day ban! Pretty severe enough, at least I think so. The non-paying members, do what you want to them, they don't support C.C.

Create a Board of Review, made up of posters from all factions at C.C. and let them review all 30 day bans to see if it's a fair punishment. Right now, if you get under a skin of a Moderator with an axe to grind, it's bye-bye poster.

One more thing I'd like to add. Having posters banned from using their pm use is totally off the wall.

Regards,
General Stoneham

[notyou2]

Please re-evaluate existing bans under current guidelines, its only fair and its the right thing to do.

[squishyg]

This revision was a good next step and it's nice to see how change can happen in a relatively short period of time.

That's bs Andy. Adding brand new rules and not applying them to the past offenders makes sense; they weren't aware they were breaking rules at the time. However, if someone changed how severe laws were, they wouldn't leave killers on death row if death row was now legalized; they would apply the current laws.

I do think that those perma-banned should be resentenced to 6 month bans under the new rules. Kotaro makes an excellent point.

[Night Strike]

Paying members should receive no more than a 1 month ban, unless it has to do with a REAL CRIME such as racism

Completely irrelevant. Just as you don't have to have premium to post on the forum, you shouldn't be allowed to buy a lesser punishment for the same offense.

Criticizing or a simple flaming of a Moderator or one of their thin-skinned supporters is considered to be capital offense right now and that's silly.

Simple flaming is simply against the rules. And those same rules spell out the punishment scale, which has now had the permanent forum ban removed.

[Woodruff]

One more thing I'd like to add. Having posters banned from using their pm use is totally off the wall.

I agree, though I seem to recall it being said that the forum system made this unavoidable (I have no actual knowledge of whether that's true or not).

[stahrgazer]

Hm, lets see what we've got so far:

Option 1

For Minor Infractions, the Disciplinary levels would remain unchanged:
Warning, 24 Hours, 72 Hours, 1 Week, 1 Month, Permanent
Major/Severe Infractions would remain unchanged:
Warning, 1 Month, Permanent
(Keep in mind, these levels don't just include Forums, but Live Chat as well as gaming on the website as well).

This is the system we have currently.

Option 2

1
For Minor Infractions, the Disciplinary levels would be as follows:
Warning, 24 Hours, 72 Hours, 1 Week, 1 Month, 6 Months, Permanent
Major/Severe Infractions would remain unchanged:
Warning, 1 Month, Permanent

Option 3

For Minor Infractions, the Disciplinary levels would be as follows:
Warning, 24 Hours, 72 Hours, 1 Week, 1 Month, 6 Months
Major/Severe Infractions would remain unchanged:
Warning, 1 Month, Permanent

We'd keep with the general current system we have no---no probationary periods, etc.

If a user comes back after a 6 Month Vacation, if their next Infraction was a Minor Infraction they would be hit with another 6 Month Vacation, no matter the period of time elapsed from the last Vacation. If their next Infraction was instead a Major/Severe Infraction, it'd probably lead to a Permanent Vacation.

Option 4

For Minor Infractions, the Disciplinary levels would be as follows:
Warning, 24 Hours, 72 Hours, 1 Week, 1 Month, 6 Months
Major/Severe Infractions would remain unchanged:
Warning, 1 Month, Permanent

Upon a user coming back after a 6 Month Vacation, if they go 6 months without a Minor or Major/Severe Infraction, their Disciplinary level could be bumped down to 1 Month for their next Minor Infraction. Should they then after those 6 months, have a Minor Infraction, they would get a 1 Month Vacation, and upon their return from the 1 Month Vacation, their next Minor Infraction would lead them to a 6 Month Vacation.

Then there are the even more radical schemes of sweeping rollbacks, but I don't think we can entertain any of those ideas at the current time.

Option 1 seems to have some current opposition, Option 2 is one proposed middle ground Option 3 is also a proposed middle ground, Option 4 is another proposed middle ground.

I think Option 4, however, may be getting to the point of making things too difficult or complex for a World Domination based gaming website.


--Andy

Option 4 is imo the best out of the listed since it addresses two problems, permanent bans for minor infractions and permanent records, but instead of a 6 month probation it should be a 1 month probation. And it should start counting after every ban.

The problems with permanent records have been pointed out as well, and the obvious remedy is that they need to go.

Agreed, on both these suggesteds (does that make option 5?)


Option 5

For Minor Infractions, the Disciplinary levels would be as follows:
Warning, 24 Hours, 72 Hours, 1 Week, 1 Month,
Major/Severe Infractions would remain unchanged:
Warning, 1 Month, Permanent

Upon a user coming back after a 1 Month Vacation, if they go 6 months without a Minor or Major/Severe Infraction, their Disciplinary level could be bumped down to 1 Week for their next Minor Infraction. Should they then after those 6 months, have a Minor Infraction, they would get a 1 Week Vacation, and upon their return from the 1 Week Vacation, their next Minor Infraction within a 6-month period would lead them to a 1 Month Vacation.

[GENERAL STONEHAM]

Agreed, on both these suggesteds (does that make option 5?)


Option 5
For Minor Infractions, the Disciplinary levels would be as follows:
Warning, 24 Hours, 72 Hours, 1 Week, 1 Month,
Major/Severe Infractions would remain unchanged:
Warning, 1 Month, Permanent


Minor infractions, hmmmmm
Major/severe infractions, hmmmm

Who determines what is what? Maybe Moderator#1 says the incident is minor, while Moderator#2 says it's Major/severe. We have seen that many have received severe punishment for a minor incident.

Any new rules, should be followed with a blanket amnesty to all.


Regards,
General Stoneham

[Mr Changsha]

Considering minor violations can be for as little as going off-topic (that's what I was given my 24 hour ban for), I fear for the creative life of GD if going off-topic five times = a 6 month ban.

Yikes!

Also, I find it hard to believe Andy comprehends just how long 6 months is. That's two thirds of a pregnancy, more than half of an academic year at university, an eighth of a President's term in office. Six months is a long time. Yet Andy is comfortable with banning a forum user for six months for going off topic five times?

I'm sorry, but if I had my pm's taken away from me for that amount of time I'd frankly quit.

[slowreactor]

Hmm... I'm not sure if someone asked this already, but what happens to members who were perma-forum-banned under the old scale? Do they still get a chance to come back if they only have repeated minor infactions?

[GENERAL STONEHAM]

Hmm... I'm not sure if someone asked this already, but what happens to members who were perma-forum-banned under the old scale? Do they still get a chance to come back if they only have repeated minor infactions?

There should be a blanket amnesty for all, after the new flogging laws are introduced.

Mr. Changsha is right, 6 months bans for just a minor violation and having your pm gone is plain wrong. 1 month ban is long enough, otherwise why would anyone renew their membership?

It's very apparent that we have Moderators and administrators that don't have a grasp on reality. The punishments being handed out don't fit the crime. It's a over-handed punishment system that has to be over-hauled. We need some real oversight on the punishment being handed out.

This progressive system of punishment is wrong and is handed out unevenly.

Regards,
General Stoneham

[PLAYER57832]

Hmm... I'm not sure if someone asked this already, but what happens to members who were perma-forum-banned under the old scale? Do they still get a chance to come back if they only have repeated minor infactions?

Andy stated they would not be reviewed. I believe that is wrong, that anyone banned previously for anything but truly major issue should get a second chance. A "on shot.. you are out", perhaps, second chance, but a chance.

However, I think admin has spoken and no further changes will be made, now.

[GENERAL STONEHAM]

Hmm... I'm not sure if someone asked this already, but what happens to members who were perma-forum-banned under the old scale? Do they still get a chance to come back if they only have repeated minor infactions?

Andy stated they would not be reviewed. I believe that is wrong, that anyone banned previously for anything but truly major issue should get a second chance. A "on shot.. you are out", perhaps, second chance, but a chance.

However, I think admin has spoken and no further changes will be made, now.

That would be a grave mistake not to review ALL perma-bans and those on shorter lengths of bans.

Change the rules of punishments, should be followed with a blanket amnesty for all.

Regards,
General Stoneham

[Mr Changsha]

Hmm... I'm not sure if someone asked this already, but what happens to members who were perma-forum-banned under the old scale? Do they still get a chance to come back if they only have repeated minor infactions?

Andy stated they would not be reviewed. I believe that is wrong, that anyone banned previously for anything but truly major issue should get a second chance. A "on shot.. you are out", perhaps, second chance, but a chance.

However, I think admin has spoken and no further changes will be made, now.

That would be a grave mistake not to review ALL perma-bans and those on shorter lengths of bans.

Change the rules of punishments, should be followed with a blanket amnesty for all.

Regards,
General Stoneham

Ah, but if you believe as I do that the escalating system was expressly designed to weed out the unruly, the anarchic and the unconventional under the guise of formality ("Look! There is a set system in place! How can we be doing anything untoward eh?") then you'll see why any they've so far managed to knock off are hardly going to be offered a resurrection. It would kind of defeat the point, wouldn't it?

Andy hoodwinked the community (again.. this after introducing the escalating system through the bigotory guidelines to give the illusion of consultation on that issue...do you remember Andy referring to that thread as evidence of consultation on this point and the forum saying WTF???) into framing this debate about shortening the ban from one year to six months. You would think that anyone with two brain cells to rub together would realise that in effect the bans mean the same thing...especially when you take into account that after the member comes back after his six months (assuming he really loved CC enough to bother) he would be one post away from being banned again for another six months. All this for minor infractions like going off-topic, for example.

Actually, that's a lie. No one gets banned for going off-topic. I should know, about 50% of my posts have been and continue to be off-topic. You actually get banned for laying into a moderator...andy then trawls through your posts for something 'technically in violation' and then bans you for that. How do I know? Because it finally occoured to me a few days after I got my ban that I had called (censored) a junior mod and a pen monitor in GD. A couple of days later I was on a ban. Timminz had a similar experience...

The upshot of all this is that this thread was an absolute waste of energy for a great many honest, trusting people. I mean how many posters actually wanted the six month ban for minor infractions? Any? Please stand up if you did!

The racism thread (Andy's great success so we were led to believe) was also an absolute waste of time too. That was contrived merely to get the community to agree to this escalting system under the pretense of fighting racism. A complete con job that. So many fell for it, sadly.

Finally, the strongest indicator that the forum as a whole is bloody furious with the admins on this site for insulting our collective intelligence is the nominations for OP's consultation group. Look who's getting nominated. Those of us who have consistantly stood up to the administration over the way they treat this forum and its members. Who will be placed in the group? You can be sure as hell it won't be me...

[Mr Changsha]

Ahoy Folks,

Taking into account the public opinions in this topic (in addition to a number of others located in other topics), along with Team CC input, and lastly with Disciplinary Data History of Conquer Club, the Minor Infractions Disciplinary scale from this date forth will be as follows:

Warning, 24 Hour Vacation, 72 Hour Vacation, 1 Week Vacation, 1 Month Vacation, 6 Month Vacation* -- *with repeated 6 Month Vacations should any user conduct Minor Infractions upon their release from Vacation.

For now, we've decided to go without the more bulky and more difficult to track system of roll back probationary periods. With the current tools we have in place for Disciplinary Measures, I don't think we can efficiently, consistently, and approriately keep track of an extended system.

===============================

And because while doing Disciplinary Data History research, I found the results to be rather interesting, and I know the community is sometimes interested in hard number, I thought I would share some of the general data numbers with you all. Since January 2006:

• Total of Permanent Website Vacations Issued to Date, excluding spambots/mutlis/misc: 51
  
  
  • Total of Permanent Website Vacations Issued to Date, brought about by Gaming Infractions: 41 of 51
    
  • Total of Permanent Website Vacations Issued to Date, brought about by Forum Infractions: 10 of 51
    
    
    • Total of Permanent Forum Vacations Issued to Date, excluding spambots/mutlis/misc, and those who've already reached a Permanent Website Ban: 17

===============

I'll be updating the Community Guidelines and other topics as necessary.


--Andy

Ok, I just went through the entire thread and the only poster who actually agrees with Andy is.........

Colton24!

nah it should be kinda like that but like this:
warning
24-hour ban
3-day ban
1-month ban
6-month ban
1-year ban
Get the bleep outta here ( we will take bribes of premuim )
Get the bleep outta here ( no bribes )

That's it. Not one other person in this thread actually agreed with what's come out of this. Not one. Oh, JoshyBoy might have agreed with him, but he was winking at me so I took his post as humorous in its intent.

Andy, how do you justify this? Seriously...

with repeated 6 Month Vacations should any user conduct Minor Infractions upon their release from Vacation.

By the way I think the quote above might just be the most kafka-esque thing I have ever read on CC. 'Repeated SIX MONTH vacations' What?????

[Night Strike]

Andy hoodwinked the community (again.. this after introducing the escalating system through the bigotory guidelines to give the illusion of consultation on that issue...do you remember Andy referring to that thread as evidence of consultation on this point and the forum saying WTF???) into framing this debate about shortening the ban from one year to six months.

The escalating punishment system has always been in place. It just wasn't enforced to the letter because some people would get half a dozen various warnings before receiving a 24 hour vacation. Now that the scales are being followed more consistently (which was a previous complaint of the forum members), people get upset.