GuiardoTuneweaver
Staff Emeritus
Thinkmeats said:
Funny, with a quick scan of the replies in this thread, it's 3 for, 3 against, and 2 that seem on the line. Not a crushing majority at all if these are representative....
Public Ban Record
- Thread starter Waldoff
- Start date
Funny, with a quick scan of the replies in this thread, it's 3 for, 3 against, and 2 that seem on the line. Not a crushing majority at all if these are representative....
Allielyn
*Pony*
Having been in a leadership position once or twice myself, I can honestly say this would be a terrible idea. There reasons are multiple:
1. No matter how good a job you do, no matter how perfect you (and your methods) are, there will be people who disagree with you. These people will cause drama. Using any minor and/or petty reason to do so.
2. Whenever a leader gives a decision, he/she is asked to explain the decision. Whenever a leader explains a decision, he/she is crucified by the people referenced in (1), particularly if they disagree, regardless of whether or not they truly understand.
3. Keep in mind that as a leader, it's the leader's job to have stress and the people's job to have fun. When the people are discussing the stressful aspects of the issue, they aren't having fun: and the leader gets more stress.
I realize that SoD is not a pure top-down organized approach. The leaders like to be the people who have fun too (this is why you don't contact them with GM stuff when they're playing: it's a bannable offense for a reason) And since this is a community, they enjoy feedback on the gameplay/balance/etc. aspects of the game (like in this forum). But in regards to the administrative running of the server, it would be a Drama Nightmare for everyone involved to implement something like this.
As an aside, I must mention that in my experience, GMs don't ban people based on one small violation. It's on one small violation that broke the camels back because it was stacked upon a bunch of other large and/or small violations.
I love the GMs! Hear Hear for people that do a difficult job and for the most part do it perfectly well!! :hug: I can say from experience that I understand what it's like - and I don't envy any of you one bit.
1. No matter how good a job you do, no matter how perfect you (and your methods) are, there will be people who disagree with you. These people will cause drama. Using any minor and/or petty reason to do so.
2. Whenever a leader gives a decision, he/she is asked to explain the decision. Whenever a leader explains a decision, he/she is crucified by the people referenced in (1), particularly if they disagree, regardless of whether or not they truly understand.
3. Keep in mind that as a leader, it's the leader's job to have stress and the people's job to have fun. When the people are discussing the stressful aspects of the issue, they aren't having fun: and the leader gets more stress.
I realize that SoD is not a pure top-down organized approach. The leaders like to be the people who have fun too (this is why you don't contact them with GM stuff when they're playing: it's a bannable offense for a reason) And since this is a community, they enjoy feedback on the gameplay/balance/etc. aspects of the game (like in this forum). But in regards to the administrative running of the server, it would be a Drama Nightmare for everyone involved to implement something like this.
As an aside, I must mention that in my experience, GMs don't ban people based on one small violation. It's on one small violation that broke the camels back because it was stacked upon a bunch of other large and/or small violations.
I love the GMs! Hear Hear for people that do a difficult job and for the most part do it perfectly well!! :hug: I can say from experience that I understand what it's like - and I don't envy any of you one bit.
JayelleNephilim
"Helpy Helper"
I don't understand the point of a public ban record other than to appease a few people that are otherwise paranoid to start playing on this server, and feed the desire for drama (or so I see it). Emphasis on the later. That being said (and coming from someone who misses drama almost as much as high school or tetnis shots) I'd lean toward NO PUBLIC BAN RECORD.
IMHO people will just /ooc their 2cp in game and that is almost more annoying. I can skip a thread here, but I'd be forced to put a whole community on /ignore -- turning off /ooc temporarily -- because of a few drama queens that want to go on about why so and so got banned. You stated my point exactly in your post below ...
Those like the few people that have posted to argue their ban will do so regardless -- Public ban record or not. From what I've seen so far, even after they've had a chance to see right from the GM'S Mouth why they got banned .. they still argued the fact
But that is just my 2cp, and it's not like it's something that is going to be put into effect because we vote one way or the other anyways. Imagine all the hard work (on the staffers part) that would go into something like that ... would it really make or break the way we play the game? NO ... so why waste their time with the idea of it? No offense to the original poster or those supporting the idea. Again, JUST MY 2cp.
**edited original post rather than spamming with yet another on this "banfest" topic
In the post below Waldoff said:
IMHO people will just /ooc their 2cp in game and that is almost more annoying. I can skip a thread here, but I'd be forced to put a whole community on /ignore -- turning off /ooc temporarily -- because of a few drama queens that want to go on about why so and so got banned. You stated my point exactly in your post below ...
Waldroff said:
Those like the few people that have posted to argue their ban will do so regardless -- Public ban record or not. From what I've seen so far, even after they've had a chance to see right from the GM'S Mouth why they got banned .. they still argued the fact
But that is just my 2cp, and it's not like it's something that is going to be put into effect because we vote one way or the other anyways. Imagine all the hard work (on the staffers part) that would go into something like that ... would it really make or break the way we play the game? NO ... so why waste their time with the idea of it? No offense to the original poster or those supporting the idea. Again, JUST MY 2cp.
**edited original post rather than spamming with yet another on this "banfest" topic
I think you guys are taking the "drama" this will cause out of porportion. I was leader of my own guild for around 4 years on EQLive, and we had somethign similiar to this, and it worked well. I understand this is a much larger audience and that its a pressed comparison, but ideas like this have worked before, and worked well.
Understand that I am not saying give us a thread that is an open forum for people to talk about bans, im talking about a closed forum, with just information, that has a disclaimer saying reply and your name will appear here.
Right now, i see a lot of people banned that claim they have no idea what they did wrong, or that they did something that doesnt deserve banning. Its all over OOC, and there are multiple posts in the forums. I beleive at least 9/10 of those bans is a repeate of an offense that happened before, and the fact that you cant see how long the rule or rules have been enforced just gives them more ammo to shoot on the forums. If there is a list, and 3 other people have been banned for the same offense, the guy in question has no reason to start flaming in the forums, as he has had a record that he could have read that shows clearly that that offense is bannable. And even if he *did* try to start a flame on the boards, no one would support him, since the offense has already been established as a ban.
For the rare new circumstance ban that has not been repeated, I dont see how posting a reason would give people ammo to flame. If anything, it will clarify the GMs position and give the people against it that much less room to manuever on the boards. I also dont understand the "amount of work involved" argument, iI am asking for literally a line of text for each ban;
Waldoff - Permenent Ban - Exposed himself to lord Kaezul at Dec. 25 GM event.
...
Anyway, that being said I have not been here as long as most of the people posting on this thread, and I do not know how the general populus has reacted to things like this in the past. If the SOD memberbase is already past the "benefit of the doubt" stage, then there isnt much to discuss, and this idea will absolutely not work. Just wanted to address some of the issues i *could* answer.
-Cheers
Waldoff
Understand that I am not saying give us a thread that is an open forum for people to talk about bans, im talking about a closed forum, with just information, that has a disclaimer saying reply and your name will appear here.
Right now, i see a lot of people banned that claim they have no idea what they did wrong, or that they did something that doesnt deserve banning. Its all over OOC, and there are multiple posts in the forums. I beleive at least 9/10 of those bans is a repeate of an offense that happened before, and the fact that you cant see how long the rule or rules have been enforced just gives them more ammo to shoot on the forums. If there is a list, and 3 other people have been banned for the same offense, the guy in question has no reason to start flaming in the forums, as he has had a record that he could have read that shows clearly that that offense is bannable. And even if he *did* try to start a flame on the boards, no one would support him, since the offense has already been established as a ban.
For the rare new circumstance ban that has not been repeated, I dont see how posting a reason would give people ammo to flame. If anything, it will clarify the GMs position and give the people against it that much less room to manuever on the boards. I also dont understand the "amount of work involved" argument, iI am asking for literally a line of text for each ban;
Waldoff - Permenent Ban - Exposed himself to lord Kaezul at Dec. 25 GM event.
...
Anyway, that being said I have not been here as long as most of the people posting on this thread, and I do not know how the general populus has reacted to things like this in the past. If the SOD memberbase is already past the "benefit of the doubt" stage, then there isnt much to discuss, and this idea will absolutely not work. Just wanted to address some of the issues i *could* answer.
-Cheers
Waldoff
Thinkmeats
War Is Good For Business
To the people saying public ban records never work: http://www.somethingawful.com/
Im new, i have seen 2 bans so far during banfest (both were more than deserved), and there is no point making a big deal about it. People shouldnt get scared or pushed away by the big red letters, they should read what its about and WHY the GM's made it so clear. If they dont understand, and dont start here....their loss.
I started the day before banfest, and realized that a) the community here is nicer then on live or any other mmorpg i played before and b) the GM's are VERY reasonable, banfest or not.
Do i sound like a fanboi now?
I started the day before banfest, and realized that a) the community here is nicer then on live or any other mmorpg i played before and b) the GM's are VERY reasonable, banfest or not.
Do i sound like a fanboi now?
That was relative to your guild. That's a lot different than taking that approach to the game itself. You can police much of the drama that would ensue within your guild by simply turning them away. No one outside your guild cares, and most of the people inside it are likely on board with your actions in the first place. You try that at the game level, and there is no safety valve. A banned player will without a doubt make their case in the forums for all to see, justifiably or not, and the drama will exist. There is just no reason to invite that.Waldoff said:
The rules couldn't possibly be more simple. Don't be a malcontent. Don't be a douchebag. Don't do things that someone else might view as douchebaggy, even if you don't. Show...simple...common...courtesy.Waldoff said:
I see no reason to appease those who can't be civil with any sort of explanation. It might sound a bit crass, but if you get banned, and you don't know what you did, then you probably aren't the kind of player that is desired in the first place. Sure, there will be the occasional case where the person just got a bum rap, but I'm perfectly willing to accept those losses, even in the event that I could be in their shoes one day.
This when the devs already have their hands not just full, but positively overflowing. It's not a simple act of typing out one line of text. It's a matter of typing out lines of text for every player banned. It's a matter of the overhead administering such a process involves. Just keeping track of the task of maintaining that list is much more trouble than the actual maintenance itself, especially with the ROI is next to nil.Waldoff said:
I don't think it's necessary to have a ban list, the folks that were banned were banned for one of the reasons on the front page, minus the blue pants. And the two that were banned when I had been around fit into the categories on the front page, and therefore should have been banned. I also feel that the Banfest banner should'nt discourage decent folks from joining, but might encourage them to join. I had a friend that was interested in the game and her comment about it had been that this must be a much better community than EQlive if they really follow through with that. Although I did think it was kind of funny when she asked why she could 'nt send tells to Wizards
Danku
Dalayan Beginner
Actually I would imagine the germanic influence upon the Yiddish language would be because the Jewish folk were living in Europe for the last thousand years. Have to rememer the nation of Israel was formed after WW II, which is pretty recently in the time spawn of history.
Yep, out of personal experience (i am german and have a pal that lives in Israel that visits me now and then) i can tell: He was amazed when he came here and was actually able to read half of the public signs cause he knew the words, or similar words from his own language. I think the other way around it would be harder.