A change to how Excessive Warning Points bans are handled.

[wizard-chan]

I suggest changing excessive warning points bans to expire when the adequate amount of warnings do. How it's handled now is fairly ridiculous. Even in normal use, you make mistakes and warning points accumulate over time due to the long expiry periods.

I suggest that users banned for this are unbanned when their warning points expired, as they would have not been banned for the same rule breaking if they had already expired previously.

 

[JasmeowTheCat]

-1 Absolutely not. If you are banned, you stay banned. It's like Minecraft, you don't just work off the punishment by being a good boy.

 

[wizard-chan]

-1 Absolutely not. If you are banned, you stay banned. It's like Minecraft, you don't just work off the punishment by being a good boy.

This is nothing like Minecraft. The suggestion isn't intended for people like Tinuy, it's suggested for those who accumulate warning points over longer periods.

 

[Geek]

This is nothing like Minecraft. The suggestion isn't intended for people like Tinuy, it's suggested for those who accumulate warning points over longer periods.

How much longer do you want than the 4 years that people like Tinuy have been on site?

 

[wizard-chan]

How much longer do you want than the 4 years that people like Tinuy have been on site?

Last I checked Tinuy accumulated a lot of warning points quite recently.

 

[Geek]

Last I checked Tinuy accumulated a lot of warning points quite recently.

While this may be true, it's irrelevant to the fact that users have joined the site and within 24 hours accumulate points. These users are from all different account creation years, so does that mean that if you get x points in y time, you can't be privy to this policy?

 

[Zero]

I don't agree with this, but I think they should adjust the expiration times of warning points. 10 of my WP will expire in 2023, like c'mon man all of this just for a naughty joke.

 

[madsiv]

Let's put up an example. A user is scamming people, and get's a lot of points.
So when the points expire, the user is unbanned? So the user can again start scamming again?

In my opinion, it's better to keep them separated, so the points have nothing to do with the bans, ONLY something to do with Suspensions. A ban should be MCM's way to say NO forever for the user.

 

[wizard-chan]

Let's put up an example. A user is scamming people, and get's a lot of points.
So when the points expire, the user is unbanned? So the user can again start scamming again?

In my opinion, it's better to keep them separated, so the points have nothing to do with the bans, ONLY something to do with Suspensions. A ban should be MCM's way to say NO forever for the user.

A user is scamming people wouldn't be banned for Excessive Warning Points.
They'd be banned for Scamming.

 

[Ally]

Do you know how many chances people get?

A lot.

For most offences made in shoutbox, if they're not severe, there are 2 chances to break them without getting warning points and only suffering a 1 hour kick the second time. 2 full chances to account for accidents. If you break the rules a third time, it's absolutely and reasonably assumed you know the rules already, and you're issued points.

For offences on the forums, things are a little bit stricter. However for the least serious offences, sometimes points won't be issued and the posts removed only. Then for something like 1.8, you only get what, 1 point? Heck, most of the 1.x points don't even give you enough to be suspended initially.

On top of that, you have a 75 point threshold. You have a threshold that should hold out easily in 3 years unless you repeatedly break the same rules over and over again, or you break more serious rules like 1.6 8 times.

For even more severe rule violations, like accidental sharing of unowned resources, the punishments are more harsh, but you learn your lesson really quickly.

Now - if you're someone who, once you receive points, you start rolling down a hill with them, consider taking a step back. I know during my time there were quite a few people like that. Reconsider what you say and how you behave because whether you like it or not, punishments are a good indicator of how you behave. It's not hard to stop yourself from telling people that they're a <insert slur or insult here>, or insert anything disrespectful. It's really not.

Excessive points bans occur most of the time when people break the same rules. But most of the time it's not people like Norska or Tinuy - whose bans are quite few and far between, it's people who repeatedly post Hypixel Skyblock items, blackhat tools and services, a lot of the stuff that comes under forbidden products. That should say something about how excessive points ban work. They work. And that should say something about point expiry time - they work too - there's no reason to change the vast majority of them, unless you have a valid reason for one or a few being too long in particular.

(And P.S. not all expiry times are made equal)
(Also another edit but I don't know how many times this same exact thing has been said before but it has, time and time again when people complain about expiry times)

 

[Kjell]

I think that if you change the suggestion it might have a good chance of sticking with the site but the examples put down under this thread are the reason it's not going to get accepted.

Let me explain,
Like everyone says, if a user gets banned for "Excessive warning points" with their actions being known as scummy or fraudulent, there is indeed no point in unbanning them since half of the time they'll just get tempted to scam someone again, thus, basically wasting staff time even more.

Though on the other hand if someone were to get warning points for inappropriate jokes and has been on-site for a fair amount of time the reason for undoing the punishment seems way fairer to me than the first example. And yes I do know that this can still depend on different factors around the jokes and the users' activity on-site but let's just keep it as a possibility for now.

The Conclusion being, the option should be there but not in an automatic form. If the user is banned for an x-amount of months or years they can appeal their ban, even if the punishment was righteous. (And yes unbanning people could still come with a lot of unknown factors depending on the banned user's history on-site)

 

[wizard-chan]

I think that if you change the suggestion it might have a good chance of sticking with the site but the examples put down under this thread are the reason it's not going to get accepted.

Let me explain,
Like everyone says, if a user gets banned for "Excessive warning points" with their actions being known as scummy or fraudulent, there is indeed no point in unbanning them since half of the time they'll just get tempted to scam someone again, thus, basically wasting staff time even more.

Though on the other hand if someone were to get warning points for inappropriate jokes and has been on-site for a fair amount of time the reason for undoing the punishment seems way fairer to me than the first example. And yes I do know that this can still depend on different factors around the jokes and the users' activity on-site but let's just keep it as a possibility for now.

The Conclusion being, the option should be there but not in an automatic form. If the user is banned for an x-amount of months or years they can appeal their ban, even if the punishment was righteous. (And yes unbanning people could still come with a lot of unknown factors depending on the banned user's history on-site)

The problem with appeals is they barely get any replies ever.
I've known people who've waited over 6 months for a single appeal reply.

 

[Justis]

If you’re unable to avoid violating our rules so frequently that you amass 75 warning points before any of them have had the chance to expire, then you are not the kind of user we want continuing to use our platform.

It isn’t asking much from our users, by expecting them to be capable of staying under 75 warning points at a time.

Our rules and TOS aren’t there just to look pretty.
These are the consequences for those who’ve proven that they cannot be relied upon to respect them.

This won’t be changing.

Denied, but thank you for the suggestion.