Jump to content

  •  
- - - - -

Removal of the Bans forum

bans

  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 themuntdregger

themuntdregger

    Official Troll

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1001 posts
  • LocationBehind you

Posted 30 September 2012 - 05:01 AM

I noted that the website seems to have a acquired a 'bans forum'. Thankfully, there's nothing in it, and I sincerely hope that remains the case for a long time. However, it's inevitable that eventually that 'bridge will need to be crossed'.

I'd agree that, if you're considering banning someone, it's sensible to do it fairly and that the individual is at least given the opportunity to put their side, however, i'd question the value of doing that having that process conducted in public. Sure, a bans forum makes entertaining and compelling reading, but i'd suggest that's for all the wrong reasons. It's inevitable that such discussions will sometimes get heated and personal (on both sides), and i'd question the value of airing that aspect in public (least of all making it part of a permanent record).

I guess it could be argued that the bans forum informs/educates/warns the wider community about issues. Assuming this to be the case (although i'm not sure that it is), the same purpose could be achieved simply by posting what decision was reached, why, who it affected and for how long. True, it's hardly as entertaining as seeing either side accuse, deny, provoke and insult each other. But does that really present the best image of the community to new players and the outside world?

If you must have a bans forum, use it to publicise the facts, not as a 'bear pit'. Certainly don't give it pride of place at the top of the forum.

#2 Grendous

Grendous

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 101 posts

Posted 30 September 2012 - 06:20 AM

Leave it where it is its perfectly fine being public.  Don't do things to get banned

#3 Learner

Learner

    God

  • Administrators
  • 2805 posts

Posted 30 September 2012 - 06:50 AM

Plus, the person affected should have the option of it being public or not as well.

#4 Korrode

Korrode

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 417 posts
  • LocationMelburn, Strayamate.

Posted 30 September 2012 - 07:19 AM

Yeah munt, even in EL, it's never been mandatory to address a ban in the public bans section. Anyone who does chooses to do so, rather than forum PM'ing Aislinn.

Early on in my EL life I got in trouble for illegal multi, the situation was addressed within hours but you don't see any record of it in the bans section, do you? ;)

#5 Nova

Nova

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 315 posts

Posted 30 September 2012 - 07:34 AM

Leave it and let's all just....not be rule breaking douches.

#6 Blackbeard

Blackbeard

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 284 posts

Posted 30 September 2012 - 07:53 AM

Keep it definately

#7 Wizzy

Wizzy

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 199 posts

Posted 30 September 2012 - 08:44 AM

One handy thing about it being public is others (new players) read this and learn.

#8 themuntdregger

themuntdregger

    Official Troll

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1001 posts
  • LocationBehind you

Posted 30 September 2012 - 11:51 AM

[quote name=''Grendous']Leave it where it is its perfectly fine being public. Don't do things to get banned [/quote] I think you maybe miss the point. I'm not arguing against banning ppl or the circumstances under which they ought to be banned' date=' I'm simply questioning whether it serves the interests of fairness to conduct the the process in public, and whether the nature of some of the exchanges will necessarilly present OL in the most positive light.[quote='Learner'']Plus, the person affected should have the option of it being public or not as well.[/quote] That's a laudable suggestion, but it does rather call into question the whole reason for publicising bans in the first place, ie if the reason for doing so is because it's necessary and desirable to inform the wider OL community to know the details, then there would seem few (if any) grounds to allowing offenders to opt-out.[quote name=''Korrode']Yeah munt' date=' even in EL, it's never been mandatory to address a ban in the public bans section. Anyone who does chooses to do so, rather than forum PM'ing Aislinn.[/quote'] Yup, i'm aware of this. My point is whether it's beneficial to the wider community to have bans addressed publicly regardless of whether a defendant might wish to do so.[quote name=''Korrode']Early on in my EL life I got in trouble for illegal multi' date=' the situation was addressed within hours but you don't see any record of it in the bans section, do you?[/quote'] I'm guessing that the illegal multi was accidental, as opposed to deliberate, in which case (imho) it seems a sensible way to have dealt with the matter. Even if it was deliberate, if the outcome had no wider relevance to the community, then it's difficult to see how making a public spectacle of discussions would have served any worthwhile purpose.[quote name=''Nova']Leave it and let's all just....not be rule breaking douches.[/quote] If only life was that simple. Alas' date=' rule breaking (whether or not committed by douches) is rather a fact of life from which I doubt OL will be immune. It's not just a matter of how such matters are handled, but also how they're [b'][u]seen[/u][/b] to be handled, that  determines whether the system is more widely respected as being fair.

[quote='Wizzy']One handy thing about it being public is others (new players) read this and learn[/quote] I'm sure new players do read the (EL) bans forum but I'd question whether they do so in order to learn about the rules or whether it necessarily has that effect. I'd agree that it's important that new players do get a clear idea of the rules and how they operate, but if that's only possible by reading through a bans forum, then that suggests that there's a gap between what the rules say and how they're actually applied.

In any case, my point has less to do with publicising bans, than discussions between moderators and defendants about how a ban is addressed. Necessarily it's the latter that i'm suggesting should remain private, not least for the benefit of those doing the moderating.

#9 bog

bog

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 172 posts
  • LocationEarth

Posted 30 September 2012 - 06:37 PM

but if you remove the bans forum that brings back Rule 27 you sneaky bastashio :)

#10 Korrode

Korrode

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 417 posts
  • LocationMelburn, Strayamate.

Posted 30 September 2012 - 07:58 PM

^

Soz munt but disagree, if someone wants to make discussion of their ban public i feel they should be able to. Just like if someone wants to discuss moderator action in public i feel they should be able to. They kinda go together.

#11 themuntdregger

themuntdregger

    Official Troll

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1001 posts
  • LocationBehind you

Posted 01 October 2012 - 03:55 AM

aTeh said:

but if you remove the bans forum that brings back Rule 27 you sneaky bastashio :)
lol. That's a very compelling point (+1 aTeh). Nope, i'm definitely not for bringing back Rule 27.

Korrode said:

Soz munt but disagree, if someone wants to make discussion of their ban public i feel they should be able t7. Just like if someone wants to discuss moderator action in public i feel they should be able to. They kinda go together.
I agree completely that moderator action should be open to scrutiny and a legitimate topic for community discussion. I also like the idea of the community being in a position to take forward any issues to a community poll in order to reverse/amend moderator decisions. However, I don't see that kind of constructive debate being fostered by an 'EL style' bans forum, eg :

a) That forum is limited pretty much to one topic (bans), whereas i'd argue that the whole range of moderator actions needs to be open to comment.

b ) The forum is used less to discuss bans than for defendants to plead/deny/insult and moderators to accuse/provoke/threaten. If the purpose of such discussions is for the moderator and defendant to help resolve issues, then i'd argue that doing it in public doesn't help. I wouldn't go as far as to ban that kind of discussion, but neither would I want to devote a whole forum especially to it.

c) The community has (imho) a legitimate interest in knowing what moderator action has been taken and why. However, that interest is hardly served by a forum  in which the onus to disclose details of action is placed on the defendant, and where the full facts of the matter are often not apparent (or at least obscured by a lot of 'cat and mouse' posturing, pleading and provocation).


I don't dispute the need for OL to have a forum to discuss moderator actions, i'd simply argue that it needs to be a little more 'grown up' than an 'el style' bans forum. For one thing, if we accept that the community has a legitimate interest in knowing what action has been taken and why, then the onus to disclose those details needs to be placed on the moderator (not the defendant). Moreover, if debate is to be informed and constructive, the manner in which details are presented needs to be impartial and dispassionate.

If it helps create a rule-set that's fair, clear and consistently applied, I think that's no bad thing.

#12 Aislinn

Aislinn

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 337 posts

Posted 01 October 2012 - 05:11 AM

:rolleyes:

#13 Wizzy

Wizzy

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 199 posts

Posted 01 October 2012 - 05:33 AM

View Postthemuntdregger, on 01 October 2012 - 03:55 AM, said:

lol. That's a very compelling point (+1 aTeh). Nope, i'm definitely not for bringing back Rule 27.I agree completely that moderator action should be open to scrutiny and a legitimate topic for community discussion. I also like the idea of the community being in a position to take forward any issues to a community poll in order to reverse/amend moderator decisions. However, I don't see that kind of constructive debate being fostered by an 'EL style' bans forum, eg :

a) That forum is limited pretty much to one topic (bans), whereas i'd argue that the whole range of moderator actions needs to be open to comment.

b ) The forum is used less to discuss bans than for defendants to plead/deny/insult and moderators to accuse/provoke/threaten. If the purpose of such discussions is for the moderator and defendant to help resolve issues, then i'd argue that doing it in public doesn't help. I wouldn't go as far as to ban that kind of discussion, but neither would I want to devote a whole forum especially to it.

c) The community has (imho) a legitimate interest in knowing what moderator action has been taken and why. However, that interest is hardly served by a forum  in which the onus to disclose details of action is placed on the defendant, and where the full facts of the matter are often not apparent (or at least obscured by a lot of 'cat and mouse' posturing, pleading and provocation).


I don't dispute the need for OL to have a forum to discuss moderator actions, i'd simply argue that it needs to be a little more 'grown up' than an 'el style' bans forum. For one thing, if we accept that the community has a legitimate interest in knowing what action has been taken and why, then the onus to disclose those details needs to be placed on the moderator (not the defendant). Moreover, if debate is to be informed and constructive, the manner in which details are presented needs to be impartial and dispassionate.

If it helps create a rule-set that's fair, clear and consistently applied, I think that's no bad thing.

This is true to a point.  But do you know how many people lie in EL bans forum? Rarely do you see a post.

PlayerX  "I did this wrong and broke rules 5,8,28. Please delete my storage and let me play again. I apologise.

This never happens, and the respect needs to go both ways too, or am I missing something here?

#14 themuntdregger

themuntdregger

    Official Troll

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1001 posts
  • LocationBehind you

Posted 01 October 2012 - 03:00 PM

View PostWizzy, on 01 October 2012 - 05:33 AM, said:

This is true to a point.  But do you know how many people lie in EL bans forum? Rarely do you see a post.

PlayerX  "I did this wrong and broke rules 5,8,28. Please delete my storage and let me play again. I apologise.

This never happens, and the respect needs to go both ways too, or am I missing something here?

Nope. I think you make a very fair and relevant point. What i'm suggesting is that conducting such discussions in public makes it harder for either side to compromise and resolve matters constructively. Human nature is unfortunately such that we're invariably less willing to give respect in public than we are in private.

#15 Wizzy

Wizzy

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 199 posts

Posted 01 October 2012 - 03:09 PM

View Postthemuntdregger, on 01 October 2012 - 03:00 PM, said:

Nope. I think you make a very fair and relevant point. What i'm suggesting is that conducting such discussions in public makes it harder for either side to compromise and resolve matters constructively. Human nature is unfortunately such that we're invariably less willing to give respect in public than we are in private.

It is also a way to prove some players are not treated more fairly than others in ban cases when it is public.

i.e. "Oh, he broke rule 12 and didn't get banned because he buys $$$$$$$$$$$$$ items from shope"

#16 PandemiC

PandemiC

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 639 posts
  • LocationLondon, United Kingdom

Posted 02 October 2012 - 03:59 AM

Bans forums in some cases is a good thing. Where people can vouch and say 'that was totally out of character, look deeper into it please' and it has come out that's the truth.

Making Bans public give a bit more chance for people to not want to get banned in the first place and make it public they're a bit of a silly twat. >.>

#17 Dilly

Dilly

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 83 posts

Posted 02 October 2012 - 06:24 AM

plus, the silly twats dishing out their entire personal lifestory only to try and squirm their way out of a ban as a result of them breaking the rules (the name TirunCollimthereisnospoon comes to mind) have an entertainment value that should not be discarded.

#18 themuntdregger

themuntdregger

    Official Troll

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1001 posts
  • LocationBehind you

Posted 02 October 2012 - 05:20 PM

View PostWizzy, on 01 October 2012 - 03:09 PM, said:

It is also a way to prove some players are not treated more fairly than others in ban cases when it is public.i.e. "Oh, he broke rule 12 and didn't get banned because he buys $$$$$$$$$$$$$ items from shope"
I'd agree it's important that ppl are seen to be treated fairly as much as they are treated fairly in the first place, I'd also agree that it's impossible to demonstrate fair treatment unless there's disclosure of all relevant facts. However, not every aspect of each exchange between a defendant and moderator constitutes a relevant fact or something that should be publicly disclosed, eg :

a) If the point of an exchange is obscured by length.

b ) If an exchange includes statements that are defamatory, offensive or which expose the game's operator to liability.

If we take the particular example you've given (which seems pertinent insofar as it relates to a fairly popular suspicion), i'd suggest the issue  arises because the reason for the action is not made sufficiently apparent. That doesn't mean the action was necessarily wrong or unfair, but it does serve to illustrate how simply publicising the exchanges between a moderator and defendant (as per the 'el style' bans forum) doesn't  automatically demonstrate why a decision is fair and reasonable.

As to an alternative, it would seem fairer on all (moderator, defendant and the community) if the moderators had responsibility to report all actions on the forum along with the reasons and supporting facts. The community/defendant would then be in a position to discuss this fully and, if anyone (including the defendant) wanted to challenge or modify the original decision (or even censure the moderator), then they'd be free to then take it to a public vote (subject to paying Learner the usual fee ofc).

Pandemic said:

Making Bans public give a bit more chance for people to not want to get banned in the first place and make it public they're a bit of a silly twat.
Based on the number of ppl who seemed to get banned from el in the last few months, i'd say the deterrent effect isn't that great. Imho, the factor most likely to stop ppl getting themselves banned is how much they enjoy and value playing the game, not fear of being ritually humiliated in a bans forum.

Dilly said:

plus, the silly twats dishing out their entire personal lifestory only to try and squirm their way out of a ban as a result of them breaking the rules (the name TirunCollimthereisnospoon comes to mind) have an entertainment value that should not be discarded
Kind of like 'witch burning'. Yup, I miss the entertainment value of that too. ;)

#19 Schrodinger

Schrodinger

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts

Posted 02 October 2012 - 05:56 PM

+1 to the entertainment value of anything WhiteRhino ever wrote

#20 PandemiC

PandemiC

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 639 posts
  • LocationLondon, United Kingdom

Posted 04 October 2012 - 05:28 AM

View PostSchrodinger, on 02 October 2012 - 05:56 PM, said:

+1 to the entertainment value of anything WhiteRhino ever wrote

Second that. :P

Especially if you saw his 'I was in a serious car accident and cant play EL anymore' speech on the facebook.


But the thing you have to realise, Bans probably aren't going to be managed solely by Learner.
I think that the community also has a say in allowing people back into EL, so by keeping the bans forum here people have a chance to voice their opinion. Although its fair to say if you broke a minor rule, whatever that rule is and people 'hate' you and you are kicked out permanently that is quite unfair.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users