gametechmods
Site Information => Site News and Feedback => Topic started by: Meganerdbomb on May 09, 2016, 07:08:32 PM
-
so i guess perma-bans mean nothing anymore if people can just make another account
like seriously this is like the third time this has happened
he has a point. permaban covers alts man.
andy blew his chances long ago and needs to deal with the consequences
So what's the over/under on him getting banned again before RA3 is released?
The people have spoken. Ban Goon, or we all leave GTM.
-
We kinda can't kick HA out if we let LRA2 / Avalanche stay. Just wouldn't seem fair. At least that's how I see it.
(I mean that as in "let them both stay" and not "kick both out")
-
or we all leave GTM.
Wat? We all leave GTM?!
-
or we all leave GTM.
Wat? We all leave GTM?!
Yeah dude. *Literally* everybody on the forum is going to leave. We plan on making our mass-migration to RA2 Refuge (http://z11.invisionfree.com/roboticwasteland/index.php?) if action isn't taken soon.
-
We kinda can't kick HA out if we let LRA2 / Avalanche stay. Just wouldn't seem fair. At least that's how I see it.
LRA2 was a kid (he was legit nine years old) when he was banned so I can excuse that. He's matured a lot since then.
Andy doesn't have any excuses for what he's done, he's a grown ass man.
-
Signing onto the case folks. I'll get the crew together and figure out where we go from here, hopefully we'll have this figured out tomorrow. Most likely we'll be asking for community involvement in the final decision. Stand by.
-
If he doesn't stay I am leaving :beer:
-
If you ban Goon I'm gonna RIOT
heh see what i did there
-
If he doesn't stay I am leaving :beer:
In that case I withdraw my request. ACAMS has spoken. Nothing to see here.
-
Good to know I don't need to actively troll to piss people off.
-
We kinda can't kick HA out if we let LRA2 / Avalanche stay. Just wouldn't seem fair. At least that's how I see it.
LRA2 was a kid (he was legit nine years old) when he was banned so I can excuse that. He's matured a lot since then.
Wait he was 9? Seriously?
-
Didn't acams sorta, kinda retire ages ago, anyway? What difference does it make.
Imo, Avalanche is fine, due to the previously mentioned reason, but HA was a man capable of making his own decisions at the time he was banned (which was around 6 months ago, mind you), so he is held accountable, and must now suffer the consequences of his actions.
And yes, I am willing to leave if goon stays. I don't want it to come to that, though.
I mean, what use is a permaban if I were to (god forbid) troll the entire forum, get myself banned, and just come back half a year later with a different account, and be accepted?
-
Has avalanche really changed that much? But back to Andy I think that if he is willing to change he should have a probation period where if he does anything worth a warning he gets banned again.
-
And yes, I am willing to leave if goon stays. I don't want it to come to that, though.
That's kinda childish IMO. Let's be honest; no-one's gonna really be bothered if you, or any other standard member leaves. The forums aren't gonna collapse so leaving won't change a thing.
He's hasn't done anything wrong yet, so I think it'd be unfair to form such a negative opinion of him, regardless of what he was like with his other account.
-
regardless of what he was like with his other account.
Why should we disregard that? Doesn't that undermine the purpose of perma-banning?
-
When someone is permabanned it means that community staff decided that the individual was no longer welcome on the forums. The matter of which "account" they log in with is irrelevant. All accounts of the individual should have the same applied to them (especially as multi accounting is also banned right?).
In every community that I have been is a staff position I've encountered people making new accounts to circumvent permabans and have simply re-banned then and IP-banned where possible.
If a player wants to appeal a ban after sufficient time has passed, I see no problem with them contacting forum staff and requesting a second chance. New accounts are not in anyway the answer.
-
And yes, I am willing to leave if goon stays. I don't want it to come to that, though.
As was said beforehand : Leave. No one will give a damn.
He's hasn't done anything wrong yet, so I think it'd be unfair to form such a negative opinion of him, regardless of what he was like with his other account.
You have no idea how he was back then. And no, I believe it is very fair if people form negative opinions about ex-disruptive members.
If he wants redemption he's gonna have to work through that bad reputation he got.
As for I, I am willing to give him a chance. If he blows it up, however, I'll be the first to get him out of those forums.
-
Preface: This message does not speak for the rest of the staff, purely my own opinions and does not reflect any staff decisions.
Didn't acams sorta, kinda retire ages ago, anyway? What difference does it make.
And yet he still pays for the servers, so has more of a say than anyone else as to how his website is run.
If a player wants to appeal a ban after sufficient time has passed, I see no problem with them contacting forum staff and requesting a second chance. New accounts are not in anyway the answer.
We were informed of Goon's identity prior to any posts being made. Imagine what it would've been like if he came back on the prior account. Nobody cared about Goon being around until they learned of who he is, seems a little prejudiced imo.
This is all my doing however as I was the first staff member told. I just believed GTM could get past old feelings if the member shows improvement, which Goon has. It's everyone else that hasn't changed.
-
He's hasn't done anything wrong yet, so I think it'd be unfair to form such a negative opinion of him, regardless of what he was like with his other account.
You have no idea how he was back then. And no, I believe it is very fair if people form negative opinions about ex-disruptive members.
...Fair enough, I guess I didn't know. It just didn't seem quite right (at least, in my opinion) to assume he'll be disruptive again. But as you said, I have no idea what he was like. He seems OK so far, though...
I honestly think we- never mind, I'd basically be saying what Craaig said except it wouldn't be worded as well.
-
If a player wants to appeal a ban after sufficient time has passed, I see no problem with them contacting forum staff and requesting a second chance. New accounts are not in anyway the answer.
We were informed of Goon's identity prior to any posts being made. Imagine what it would've been like if he came back on the prior account. Nobody cared about Goon being around until they learned of who he is, seems a little prejudiced imo.
This is all my doing however as I was the first staff member told. I just believed GTM could get past old feelings if the member shows improvement, which Goon has. It's everyone else that hasn't changed.
So what was the process here? Did he create the account and you guys found out, or did he tell you, or did you tell him to create a new account?
As I said, if it was decided that he should have a second chance then go right ahead, I have no problems here.
He's only had a few posts so time will tell.
-
He made the account, left it dormant for a while, and then told us before posting.
-
He made the account, left it dormant for a while, and then told us before posting.
Alright seems fair. How did everyone else find out? I'm not in the loop.
-
I can vouch for Craaig. Andrew said to Craaig "hey, i'm goon" basically, and Craaig reported it to the rest of the staff. There was some disagreements over keeping him or not in the staff, but we decided to let it slide, as long as he didn't cause any trouble.
And there still ARE disagreements in the staff, now that opinion is generally negative about keeping him.
As for myself, I stick to my position : keep him, unless he causes some trouble again. If he does, ban him. And a permaban this time, so that he doesn't make other accounts and we don't restart that again.
We are unsure about the specifics of banning him, if it is zero tolerance or "one written warning, then immediate ban if he continues". We are discussing about that.
_______
And yes, Craaig, people are being prejudiced because Andrew HAS been frequently berating, flaming, insulting people previously. As for his current behavior, he HAS improved, yes, but nothing tells me he's not going to burst out and flame again later, as he is prone to do when he is frustrated IRL.
-
We were informed of Goon's identity prior to any posts being made. Imagine what it would've been like if he came back on the prior account. Nobody cared about Goon being around until they learned of who he is, seems a little prejudiced imo.
Of course it is, it's because people now know his identity. If a new member joins, people don't judge them until they start doing stuff. In this case, people know what he has done before, so they have a right to form that opinion.
I love how, with ~10 posts, people are saying that he's gotten better. He's just quiet at the moment. It's not like, when he was using his HA account, he was 'trolling' 24/7.
I suppose I'd be okay with seeing how he does and if he's actually better (with a zero tolerance attitude) but I'm wondering why he was perma-banned in the first place if people are so quick to let him come back. Like I said, it undermines being perma-banned in the first place.
-
I have seen some pretty edgy posting in the chatbox coming from him. Now i'm leaning towards an immediate ban, discussing it with the staff.
-
good to know literally nothing has changed with you andy. i figured you'd have given up and moved onto some other website to troll by now
Please show me how I've trolled since my return.
Protip: You can't.
I made less than 10 posts and then you guys attacked me when you realized who I was and I gave it right back. I never instigated any of it.
It's not like I really tried to hide my identity. In fact, I tried to make it blatantly obvious. I even have messages from Craaig and Thyrus discussing the matter before any of you even had a clue.
-
I just believed GTM could get past old feelings if the member shows improvement, which Goon has. It's everyone else that hasn't changed.
yes because making a thread asking if someone is autistic is definitely showing improvement
-
I just believed GTM could get past old feelings if the member shows improvement, which Goon has. It's everyone else that hasn't changed.
yes because making a thread asking if someone is autistic is definitely showing improvement
When'd he do this? On the HA account? On the Goon account?
-
I just believed GTM could get past old feelings if the member shows improvement, which Goon has. It's everyone else that hasn't changed.
yes because making a thread asking if someone is autistic is definitely showing improvement
When'd he do this? On the HA account? On the Goon account?
It was yesterday and about you; https://gametechmods.com/forums/index.php?topic=18959.msg700913#msg700913
-
I just believed GTM could get past old feelings if the member shows improvement, which Goon has. It's everyone else that hasn't changed.
yes because making a thread asking if someone is autistic is definitely showing improvement
When'd he do this? On the HA account? On the Goon account?
It was yesterday and about you; https://gametechmods.com/forums/index.php?topic=18959.msg700913#msg700913
That was him asking if I was autistic? Looked more like it was referring to my profile image to me...
I have Asperger Syndrome, so he's not even wrong about me being autistic anyway.
-
I just believed GTM could get past old feelings if the member shows improvement, which Goon has. It's everyone else that hasn't changed.
yes because making a thread asking if someone is autistic is definitely showing improvement
When'd he do this? On the HA account? On the Goon account?
It was yesterday and about you; https://gametechmods.com/forums/index.php?topic=18959.msg700913#msg700913
That was him asking if I was autistic? Looked more like it was referring to my profile image to me...
I have Asperger Syndrome, so he's not even wrong about me being autistic anyway.
He was putting money on you being "on the spectrum". By this, he is referring to the autistic spectrum. I mean, I could sit here and say "everyone's got autistic tendencies, so, technically everyone is on the spectrum", but I don't think anyone would care :p
-
why is this even being discussed? He's forfeited his right to come on gtm, like s_m said the account is irrelevant. what is the point of permabanning someone if they can come back on whenever?
-
We should ban HX, RFS, and TDS while we're at it, since they were banned from Aceuplink and/or the RA2 forums.
-
Whatever you guys decide, you have to apply it for all users, evenly and fairly. That means if you say that once you're permabanned, you're really permabanned, then the above accounts should be permabanned too. Personally, I think permabans aren't necessary. A year ban mac would suffice in almost every situation. As for HA/goon, if hes gonna be allowed on this account you may as well unban his main so at least we all know who he is.
That's just my 2cents
Edit:
For the record, I think HA should be let off in this case due to precedent (lra2 and sparkey) and rules should be drafted and set in stone for bans and multiaccounting, and ADHERED TO
-
Whatever you guys decide, you have to apply it for all users, evenly and fairly. That means if you say that once you're permabanned, you're really permabanned, then the above accounts should be permabanned too. Personally, I think permabans aren't necessary. A year ban mac would suffice in almost every situation. As for HA/goon, if hes gonna be allowed on this account you may as well unban his main so at least we all know who he is.
That's just my 2cents
make this guy a mod
-
bans don't have to carry over from previous forums, but bans made on this particular forum ought to be upheld.
-
bans don't have to carry over from previous forums, but bans made on this particular forum ought to be upheld.
But that would lead to the loss of outstanding members of the community such as avalanche
-
Both lra2 and sparkey were allowed back after perm bans so I don't see why not. yeah sparkey ended up getting banned again but avalanche didn't turn out that bad.
as long as HA posts his racial hatred threads in the chatterbox and doesn't spam the main forum i really don't see the problem.
-
bans don't have to carry over from previous forums, but bans made on this particular forum ought to be upheld.
But that would lead to the loss of outstanding members of the community such as avalanche
"outstanding"
-
I just believed GTM could get past old feelings if the member shows improvement, which Goon has. It's everyone else that hasn't changed.
yes because making a thread asking if someone is autistic is definitely showing improvement
It's no secret that the vast majority of GTM members are on the spectrum. Maybe you should be warned for bringing up stuff from the off topic section in the main forum , since you're so worried about upholding the rules.
-
bans don't have to carry over from previous forums, but bans made on this particular forum ought to be upheld.
But that would lead to the loss of outstanding members of the community such as avalanche
"outstanding"
You know it
-
as long as HA posts his racial hatred threads in the chatterbox and doesn't spam the main forum i really don't see the problem.
#bringbackplayground2016
-
Both lra2 and sparkey were allowed back after perm bans so I don't see why not. yeah sparkey ended up getting banned again but avalanche didn't turn out that bad.
as long as HA posts his racial hatred threads in the chatterbox and doesn't spam the main forum i really don't see the problem.
Well, I believe lra2 waited more than half a year to rejoin. I think it should be at least a year after a permaban before you even THINK about begging for a second chance. No idea about sparkey, 'cause she left before I joined.
as long as HA posts his racial hatred threads in the chatterbox and doesn't spam the main forum i really don't see the problem.
#bringbackplayground2016
Oh, lord, don't start this again.
-
Both lra2 and sparkey were allowed back after perm bans so I don't see why not. yeah sparkey ended up getting banned again but avalanche didn't turn out that bad.
as long as HA posts his racial hatred threads in the chatterbox and doesn't spam the main forum i really don't see the problem.
Well, I believe lra2 waited more than half a year to rejoin. I think it should be at least a year after a permaban before you even THINK about begging for a second chance. No idea about sparkey, 'cause she left before I joined.
LRA2 registered in may 2009 and avalanche was registered in October 2009.
-
I did some research into the subject, and I'm pretty sure that anyone prominent that has been perma-banned has made some kind of attempt to return to the site, whether it's to change their behaviour so they can be given another chance or to just continue trolling. If we know it's Andy, and he's not actively breaking the rules, and has had an extended hiatus from the website, why should he banned again?
-
I did some research into the subject, and I'm pretty sure that anyone prominent that has been perma-banned has made some kind of attempt to return to the site, whether it's to change their behaviour so they can be given another chance or to just continue trolling. If we know it's Andy, and he's not actively breaking the rules, and has had an extended hiatus from the website, why should he banned again?
Rules need to be upheld properly, even if that wasn't the case in the past. I think the question here is with what those rules should be.
-
either uphold the rules or change the rules, doing neither isn't an option
-
I did some research into the subject, and I'm pretty sure that anyone prominent that has been perma-banned has made some kind of attempt to return to the site, whether it's to change their behaviour so they can be given another chance or to just continue trolling. If we know it's Andy, and he's not actively breaking the rules, and has had an extended hiatus from the website, why should he banned again?
Rules need to be upheld properly, even if that wasn't the case in the past. I think the question here is with what those rules should be.
Although I agree the rules should be upheld (Andy even broke the multi-account rule by making the new account in the first place, something which Mechadino was, at least, muted for, iirc), this isn't a question of what the rules should be, as we're already at the point at which someone has been perma-banned. What might be wrong was the decision to ban him permanently in the first place, considering how everyone is being so vocal about giving him a second chance.
My opinion is that, if he was permanently banned, he shouldn't even have the option (never mind anyone in the past that actually did) to come back. If the higher-ups felt that the situation with Andy was so dire that he needed to be permanently banned, then he should stay that way. If the higher-ups thought that some time off would do him good but it's so dire he just needs about half a year being banned, then they would have done that.
-
Honestly, I'd maintain a case-by-case basis with regards to perma-bans, much like most judicial systems have in the form of parole. People who have served indefinite sentences have gone onto to be paroled and contribute to society; and seeing how breaking the rules on a message board is a relatively minor crime compared to what an indefinite sentence can be imposed for, as well as the scarcity of perma-bans on this website, I'd say that a parole-like policy, with a minimum time before parole can be proposed would the best case scenario. Of course, if the user continued to make multiple accounts before the parole, more and more time could be added to it.
Punishment is justice for the victims, and rehabilitation is justice for the perpetrators after all.
@Yugitom: The problem with your proposition is that if Andrew were to return after that temp ban, there would be little guarantee that his behaviour would improve after his sentence, seeing as he has had a history of being muted and warned in the past. With a permanent ban, your message is far likelier to get across as it is the most severe punishment a forum can deliver, whilst still leaving the door open for reformation.
-
I did some research into the subject, and I'm pretty sure that anyone prominent that has been perma-banned has made some kind of attempt to return to the site, whether it's to change their behaviour so they can be given another chance or to just continue trolling. If we know it's Andy, and he's not actively breaking the rules, and has had an extended hiatus from the website, why should he banned again?
Rules need to be upheld properly, even if that wasn't the case in the past. I think the question here is with what those rules should be.
Although I agree the rules should be upheld (Andy even broke the multi-account rule by making the new account in the first place, something which Mechadino was, at least, muted for, iirc), this isn't a question of what the rules should be, as we're already at the point at which someone has been perma-banned. What might be wrong was the decision to ban him permanently in the first place, considering how everyone is being so vocal about giving him a second chance.
My opinion is that, if he was permanently banned, he shouldn't even have the option (never mind anyone in the past that actually did) to come back. If the higher-ups felt that the situation with Andy was so dire that he needed to be permanently banned, then he should stay that way. If the higher-ups thought that some time off would do him good but it's so dire he just needs about half a year being banned, then they would have done that.
That's fair, but then every other member who was permabanned should be re-permabanned.
-
@Yugitom: The problem with your proposition is that if Andrew were to return after that temp ban, there would be little guarantee that his behaviour would improve after his sentence, seeing as he has had a history of being muted and warned in the past. With a permanent ban, your message is far likelier to get across as it is the most severe punishment a forum can deliver, whilst still leaving the door open for reformation.
However, he had the comfort of knowing he wasn't IP banned and that he could come back whenever he wanted, once people had calmed down. Something which he did. He didn't wait until he thought he was rehabilitated enough for the forum to handle him, he just came back at his leisure when he thought the reaction to his arrival would be exactly as it's panned out right now, a lot of people defending him asking to give him a second chance.
Also, with the court comparison, I would say it's more to do with being given life and then getting out early on good behaviour. However, the argument of whether life should actually mean life is something different.
-
On the one hand, there's actually zero reason to let him stay, given what we know, on the other, what's the worst that could happen? But for everyone complaining about consistency in the rules, that's literally never been the case, so we may as well wait till this awesome new rule system are hardworking staff is developing comes into use, then we can actually complain if the rules aren't followed.
-
On the one hand, there's actually zero reason to let him stay, given what we know, on the other, what's the worst that could happen? But for everyone complaining about consistency in the rules, that's literally never been the case, so we may as well wait till this awesome new rule system are hardworking staff is developing comes into use, then we can actually complain if the rules aren't followed.
I guess every government needs an opposition as part of the natural order of things, but must you really spit on the staff's work every occasion you get ? You're starting to sound a lot like pre-ban Andrew.
-
On the one hand, there's actually zero reason to let him stay, given what we know, on the other, what's the worst that could happen? But for everyone complaining about consistency in the rules, that's literally never been the case, so we may as well wait till this awesome new rule system are [ sic ] hardworking staff is developing comes into use, then we can actually complain if the rules aren't followed.
I detect a hint of sarcasm, there.
-
@Yugitom: The problem with your proposition is that if Andrew were to return after that temp ban, there would be little guarantee that his behaviour would improve after his sentence, seeing as he has had a history of being muted and warned in the past. With a permanent ban, your message is far likelier to get across as it is the most severe punishment a forum can deliver, whilst still leaving the door open for reformation.
However, he had the comfort of knowing he wasn't IP banned and that he could come back whenever he wanted, once people had calmed down. Something which he did. He didn't wait until he thought he was rehabilitated enough for the forum to handle him, he just came back at his leisure when he thought the reaction to his arrival would be exactly as it's panned out right now, a lot of people defending him asking to give him a second chance.
Also, with the court comparison, I would say it's more to do with being given life and then getting out early on good behaviour. However, the argument of whether life should actually mean life is something different.
I agree that the discretion on the minimum time a user should spend being banned before being allowed into the community should be decided upon by the staff, but the staff did agree to allow Andy to come back onto the website provided he followed their terms and conditions.
Parole hearings are still granted whether the prisoner is worthy or not of being released from jail; the only thing that needs to be done is for the prisoner to serve the minimum sentence. It is then the judicial system's decision whether or not the prisoner should be paroled or not.
-
On the one hand, there's actually zero reason to let him stay, given what we know, on the other, what's the worst that could happen? But for everyone complaining about consistency in the rules, that's literally never been the case, so we may as well wait till this awesome new rule system are hardworking staff is developing comes into use, then we can actually complain if the rules aren't followed.
I guess every government needs an opposition as part of the natural order of things, but must you really spit on the staff's work every occasion you get ? You're starting to sound a lot like pre-ban Andrew.
Actually, that was like 93% serious. Don't just assume the worst about me.
-
@Yugitom: The problem with your proposition is that if Andrew were to return after that temp ban, there would be little guarantee that his behaviour would improve after his sentence, seeing as he has had a history of being muted and warned in the past. With a permanent ban, your message is far likelier to get across as it is the most severe punishment a forum can deliver, whilst still leaving the door open for reformation.
However, he had the comfort of knowing he wasn't IP banned and that he could come back whenever he wanted, once people had calmed down. Something which he did. He didn't wait until he thought he was rehabilitated enough for the forum to handle him, he just came back at his leisure when he thought the reaction to his arrival would be exactly as it's panned out right now, a lot of people defending him asking to give him a second chance.
Also, with the court comparison, I would say it's more to do with being given life and then getting out early on good behaviour. However, the argument of whether life should actually mean life is something different.
I agree that the discretion on the minimum time a user should spend being banned before being allowed into the community should be decided upon by the staff, but the staff did agree to allow Andy to come back onto the website provided he followed their terms and conditions.
Parole hearings are still granted whether the prisoner is worthy or not of being released from jail; the only thing that needs to be done is for the prisoner to serve the minimum sentence. It is then the judicial system's decision whether or not the prisoner should be paroled or not.
This isn't a minimum time issue. He was permanently banned, not temporarily. That's the kind of ban that is the last resort. By using a ban like that, I would assume that the person or people behind the decision to apply it had no intention of the member returning. Although HA was allowed to return, I really don't see why he was. He may have been sincere and upfront about his return but, surely, that doesn't matter in this case.
What I'm trying to get at it is, who's being held accountable for the initial perma-banning of HA? I think I need to know exactly why he or a collective did it to understand whether or not quashing the ban is reasonable. Because, right now, it seems like Craaig let him back on the basis that he hasn't been around for a while and must've changed.
On the one hand, there's actually zero reason to let him stay, given what we know, on the other, what's the worst that could happen? But for everyone complaining about consistency in the rules, that's literally never been the case
Then, how about we start now? Perhaps it'll set the mods off on a good track record of upholding rules and keeping them consistent.
-
@Yugitom: The problem with your proposition is that if Andrew were to return after that temp ban, there would be little guarantee that his behaviour would improve after his sentence, seeing as he has had a history of being muted and warned in the past. With a permanent ban, your message is far likelier to get across as it is the most severe punishment a forum can deliver, whilst still leaving the door open for reformation.
However, he had the comfort of knowing he wasn't IP banned and that he could come back whenever he wanted, once people had calmed down. Something which he did. He didn't wait until he thought he was rehabilitated enough for the forum to handle him, he just came back at his leisure when he thought the reaction to his arrival would be exactly as it's panned out right now, a lot of people defending him asking to give him a second chance.
Also, with the court comparison, I would say it's more to do with being given life and then getting out early on good behaviour. However, the argument of whether life should actually mean life is something different.
I agree that the discretion on the minimum time a user should spend being banned before being allowed into the community should be decided upon by the staff, but the staff did agree to allow Andy to come back onto the website provided he followed their terms and conditions.
Parole hearings are still granted whether the prisoner is worthy or not of being released from jail; the only thing that needs to be done is for the prisoner to serve the minimum sentence. It is then the judicial system's decision whether or not the prisoner should be paroled or not.
This isn't a minimum time issue. He was permanently banned, not temporarily. That's the kind of ban that is the last resort. By using a ban like that, I would assume that the person or people behind the decision to apply it had no intention of the member returning. Although HA was allowed to return, I really don't see why he was. He may have been sincere and upfront about his return but, surely, that doesn't matter in this case.
What I'm trying to get at it is, who's being held accountable for the initial perma-banning of HA? I think I need to know exactly why he or a collective did it to understand whether or not quashing the ban is reasonable. Because, right now, it seems like Craaig let him back on the basis that he hasn't been around for a while and must've changed.
On the one hand, there's actually zero reason to let him stay, given what we know, on the other, what's the worst that could happen? But for everyone complaining about consistency in the rules, that's literally never been the case
Then, how about we start now? Perhaps it'll set the mods off on a good track record of upholding rules and keeping them consistent.
He's been allowed to stay because the precedent for this kind of thing is that permabans aren't really very permanent.
-
@Yugitom: The problem with your proposition is that if Andrew were to return after that temp ban, there would be little guarantee that his behaviour would improve after his sentence, seeing as he has had a history of being muted and warned in the past. With a permanent ban, your message is far likelier to get across as it is the most severe punishment a forum can deliver, whilst still leaving the door open for reformation.
However, he had the comfort of knowing he wasn't IP banned and that he could come back whenever he wanted, once people had calmed down. Something which he did. He didn't wait until he thought he was rehabilitated enough for the forum to handle him, he just came back at his leisure when he thought the reaction to his arrival would be exactly as it's panned out right now, a lot of people defending him asking to give him a second chance.
Also, with the court comparison, I would say it's more to do with being given life and then getting out early on good behaviour. However, the argument of whether life should actually mean life is something different.
I agree that the discretion on the minimum time a user should spend being banned before being allowed into the community should be decided upon by the staff, but the staff did agree to allow Andy to come back onto the website provided he followed their terms and conditions.
Parole hearings are still granted whether the prisoner is worthy or not of being released from jail; the only thing that needs to be done is for the prisoner to serve the minimum sentence. It is then the judicial system's decision whether or not the prisoner should be paroled or not.
This isn't a minimum time issue. He was permanently banned, not temporarily. That's the kind of ban that is the last resort. By using a ban like that, I would assume that the person or people behind the decision to apply it had no intention of the member returning. Although HA was allowed to return, I really don't see why he was. He may have been sincere and upfront about his return but, surely, that doesn't matter in this case.
What I'm trying to get at it is, who's being held accountable for the initial perma-banning of HA? I think I need to know exactly why he or a collective did it to understand whether or not quashing the ban is reasonable. Because, right now, it seems like Craaig let him back on the basis that he hasn't been around for a while and must've changed.
On the one hand, there's actually zero reason to let him stay, given what we know, on the other, what's the worst that could happen? But for everyone complaining about consistency in the rules, that's literally never been the case
Then, how about we start now? Perhaps it'll set the mods off on a good track record of upholding rules and keeping them consistent.
If they were consistent avalance wouldnt be here, and they are doing new rules to address this problem.
-
To prevent a quote pyramid from spawning:
Yugitom, it's no secret that permanent bans mean nothing here. Of the five prominent users that I know of that got perma-banned, 3 returned and tried to reform, one spammed the forums with alternate accounts and the other attempted to use proxies and got some normal users caught in the collateral range bans. There is nothing permanent about them; and a system that tries to present them as such is flawed. This is why I am trying to propose an undisclosed duration with a minimum time of appeal instead, given the rarity that these bans are handed out to members that aren't spambots.
I'd be pretty sure that the majority of the moderating collective agreed to the initial banning, otherwise it would have likely not have happened. And Craaig and Thyrus did the right thing in informing the moderating collective of HA's return, and allowing a decision to be made on that basis.
-
Earlier on I did propose a system involving appeals after timeframes and stuff that we are talking about, I think it'll work well.
(N.B. don't critique this message as OMG BAD IDEA because you don't know the whole proposal and you'll look dumb)
-
Earlier on I did propose a system involving appeals after timeframes and stuff that we are talking about, I think it'll work well.
(N.B. don't critique this message as OMG BAD IDEA because you don't know the whole proposal and you'll look dumb)
Maybe it would be a good idea to share said proposal with us?
-
It's a staff discussion matter, no reason to share until it's sorted.
-
Earlier on I did propose a system involving appeals after timeframes and stuff that we are talking about, I think it'll work well.
(N.B. don't critique this message as OMG BAD IDEA because you don't know the whole proposal and you'll look dumb)
The only problem I have with this is, it ensures any and all members that, whatever they do, they'll have a chance at an appeal. Surely, that diminishes the point of permanently banning them in the first place, as they are complacent in knowing that they can come back. How would appeals work? Would they be allowed to appeal after making another account? If so, will they be allowed to post in the time period of appeal?
I just think the way we look at perma-banning should change. It shouldn't be something you can recover from. I believe appeals or negotiations would work better if they simply reduced the amount of time they were banned for. For example, you could give someone a year long ban and, given they do not harass anyone outside of the forum or create multi-accounts, they'd be allowed to negotiate a new amount of time they should be banned for, after a while. Appealing a permanent ban seems like a weird concept to me because the appellant hasn't been on the forum for us to witness change, so why would our attitude change towards them other than "everyone deserves a second chance"?
-
The only problem I have with this is, it ensures any and all members that, whatever they do, they'll have a chance at an appeal. Surely, that diminishes the point of permanently banning them in the first place, as they are complacent in knowing that they can come back. How would appeals work? Would they be allowed to appeal after making another account? If so, will they be allowed to post in the time period of appeal?
I just think the way we look at perma-banning should change. It shouldn't be something you can recover from. I believe appeals or negotiations would work better if they simply reduced the amount of time they were banned for. For example, you could give someone a year long ban and, given they do not harass anyone outside of the forum or create multi-accounts, they'd be allowed to negotiate a new amount of time they should be banned for, after a while. Appealing a permanent ban seems like a weird concept to me because the appellant hasn't been on the forum for us to witness change, so why would our attitude change towards them other than "everyone deserves a second chance"?
(N.B. don't critique this message as OMG BAD IDEA because you don't know the whole proposal and you'll look dumb)
-
lol, robot game forum drama
Mind sharing some background on who the fuck is Goon and why was he banned in the first place?
-
lol, robot game forum drama
Mind sharing some background on who the fuck is Goon and why was he banned in the first place?
he was this guy called hurricaneandrew who was a troll and couldnt keep his mouth shut and got permabanned, came back as this goon person, and for some reason isn't banned again
-
he was this guy called hurricaneandrew who was a troll and couldnt keep his mouth shut
I'm not sure “trolling” should be a bannable offence... Low-quality posting, yeah, sure, but don't make the decision based on whether it aligns with your worldview or not. What he posted in this thread seems quite sane to me.
-
Maybe people deserve a second chance at this frankly exciting time for our community!
Or we could just all stick to our guns and believe no-one can ever change even when they've been told the moment they slip they'll be banned again but WHATEVER hey guys yay!
I thought the community was better than attacking people like this. If people say they're going to behave and provisions have been put in place to make sure that happens, why should they be excluded from this time in our community? Things are going to be awesome and I think it's a damn shame if people won't get over grudges to come together for a moment I'm sure most of us in the community never saw coming.
-
Earlier on I did propose a system involving appeals after timeframes and stuff that we are talking about, I think it'll work well.
(N.B. don't critique this message as OMG BAD IDEA because you don't know the whole proposal and you'll look dumb)
The only problem I have with this is, it ensures any and all members that, whatever they do, they'll have a chance at an appeal. Surely, that diminishes the point of permanently banning them in the first place, as they are complacent in knowing that they can come back. How would appeals work? Would they be allowed to appeal after making another account? If so, will they be allowed to post in the time period of appeal?
I just think the way we look at perma-banning should change. It shouldn't be something you can recover from. I believe appeals or negotiations would work better if they simply reduced the amount of time they were banned for. For example, you could give someone a year long ban and, given they do not harass anyone outside of the forum or create multi-accounts, they'd be allowed to negotiate a new amount of time they should be banned for, after a while. Appealing a permanent ban seems like a weird concept to me because the appellant hasn't been on the forum for us to witness change, so why would our attitude change towards them other than "everyone deserves a second chance"?
As I said earlier, depending on the severity and the amount of offences, the minimum time would be extended. That way, we can separate the trolls and the people who genuinely want to improve.
Also Craaig, he did post from a reasonable and well-meaning perspective based upon what you revealed. No need to insinuate that he's dumb.
-
Also Craaig, he did post from a reasonable and well-meaning perspective based upon what you revealed. No need to insinuate that he's dumb.
What I meant by what I originally said was criticizing what I revealed is an exercise in pointlessness because it's clearly intentionally not the full story. No point asking questions etc when I'm clearly not telling the entire plan anyway because they're all already answered.
-
Also Craaig, he did post from a reasonable and well-meaning perspective based upon what you revealed. No need to insinuate that he's dumb.
What I meant by what I originally said was criticizing what I revealed is an exercise in pointlessness because it's clearly intentionally not the full story. No point asking questions etc when I'm clearly not telling the entire plan anyway because they're all already answered.
You can't use the "You don't know the full story" excuse to deflect criticism if you have the ability to share the full story. I mean, I understand why you don't want to share it immediately since it's a staff matter that needs to be discussed in private, but at the same time, you can't use that as a defence to say it can't be criticized in a logical manner based on what we already know.
Bear in mind, I think what you've hinted at in your initial post is a very good idea, I just think there are better ways to respond to critique, especially when it's measured and not inflammatory like Yugi's response.
-
No I can use it and I don't need to share because it's not something that needs to be shared until all the mods agree on it.
I'm genuinely trying to make a solution for EVERYONE here and improve future situations that may arise meanwhile you lot are making it absolutely BLOOPing infuriating and I'm sick of trying so I'm done.
-
No I can use it and I don't need to share because it's not something that needs to be shared until all the mods agree on it.
I'm genuinely trying to make a solution for EVERYONE here and improve future situations that may arise meanwhile you lot are making it absolutely BLOOPing infuriating and I'm sick of trying so I'm done.
OK, so it's not something that needs to be shared until the mods agree on it. That's fine, but it doesn't mean it shouldn't be critiqued in a mature way, which is what we are doing; no-one is saying it's a terrible idea for no reason or attacking you for it, so it's unnecessary to play the victim, especially as you voluntarily let this slip in the first place.
-
Earlier on I did propose a system involving appeals after timeframes and stuff that we are talking about, I think it'll work well.
(N.B. don't critique this message as OMG BAD IDEA because you don't know the whole proposal and you'll look dumb)
You mean me? I was seriously saying we shouldn't be hasty to criticize your actions till the new rules come out.
-
No I can use it and I don't need to share because it's not something that needs to be shared until all the mods agree on it.
I'm genuinely trying to make a solution for EVERYONE here and improve future situations that may arise meanwhile you lot are making it absolutely BLOOPing infuriating and I'm sick of trying so I'm done.
OK, so it's not something that needs to be shared until the mods agree on it. That's fine, but it doesn't mean it shouldn't be critiqued in a mature way, which is what we are doing;
No. Let the big kids with red and blue names discuss it. You people need to stay out of it.
-
So I think you guys should know that Craaig got sick of the lack of logic you guys use on any matter and jumped ship. This was the straw that broke the camel's back.
Craaig - Tuesday 7:48 PM
> changed my password to a 10 digit random string and my email to dogs@lol.com and logged out
Craaig - Tuesday 7:48 PM
> done
(Thumb up emoji)
Craaig has left the group
The fact I make people mad with nothing more than my presence is fairly amusing to me. Like, I hadn't even planned on trolling and y'all just trolled yourselves just because I admitted it was me.
Do whatever you want. Tear the community apart just as there's hope of robot combat becoming mainstream again simply because you don't like people who don't fit into your clique to be here. This shall forever be your little safe space.
-
Just so we're clear, I'm actually trying to be supportive of the staff in this situation. If they have they're reasons, we need to stop complaining. But ifGoon's post is true, that's actually pretty childish, and ultimately pointless, cuz Trov can probably reset the PW.
-
As for I, I am willing to give him a chance. If he blows it up, however, I'll be the first to get him out of those forums.
Discussion really should have ended here if avalanche and jamin are anything to go by.
I'm kind of surprised that this tongue-in-cheek thread turned into what it did. We need to focus less on forum identity politics and more on games, techs, 'n mods.
-
I'm issuing an apology to Craaig and any staff members that have felt any pressure or undue stress due to my posts. I know it's not my place to impose opinion but what I believed was debating using my opinion clearly got out of hand. Unless Craaig views this as a guest, I doubt he will see it but I will be sure to contact him on Steam at some point today in order to make sure that I get my apology across to him because I feel bad that I may have caused this.
-
Craaig's patience with GTM has been worn thin over the last couple of years. Even when I was banned, we kept in contact. He would always tell me that no matter how much effort he put into improving this place, GTM continually digressed. One step forward and two steps back, essentially.
Unless he calms down and decides he wants to be here again, I'm gonna say he won't be back for a while.
GTM's "golden age" that some of us older members have fond memories of are long gone and have been for several years. Ask anyone who was around from 2008 to 2011-ish. This place was much more active when it came to showcases, tournaments, and modding, but we still had off-topic discussions and activities. It was a good time to be around. Now... I don't even know what to say about this place.
-
Sh** me, Craiig's gone. Wow. I didn't think that this would be what stops him. I mean, I get that I didn't help the situation but... Great. Now I feel terrible. Us lot have literally driven a main member away. I think this forum is well and truly dying, and that isn't me being melodramatic (again), that is the truth. If the members of the forum are driving people away, then what is the point of the forum existing? You know, I remember when I first joined. It was great. Then I went into the chatterbox, and got baited hard by HA and eventually got muted. That's probably why I kinda have a grudge against HA.
-
Maybe Goon could start putting *TRIGGER WARNING* at the start of all his posts. Might help reduce amount of HA related PTSD episodes that everyone seems to be struggling with around here.
Or you know, you could just add him to your ignore list if you don't like his posts.
-
Huh. Yet again, Craaig takes things too personally... But it was all from a laudable intention. Besides, he helped quite a bit for this situation.
Now guys, let's stop this soap opera. Everyone take a chill pill; arguing is fine, but please stop with the BS drama.
We, the staff, are taking care of this Andrew situation right now and it will be solved in the following days - I personally vouch for it and will take the blame if it is NOT solved.
-
No I can use it and I don't need to share because it's not something that needs to be shared until all the mods agree on it.
I'm genuinely trying to make a solution for EVERYONE here and improve future situations that may arise meanwhile you lot are making it absolutely BLOOPing infuriating and I'm sick of trying so I'm done.
So you post that you're working on an appeal system, and start crying when people ask about what you mean by that and how it would work. There's basically no reason that I can see to keep something like that secret from the community, and community feedback would be important for this kind of thing, in my view.
Admins are looked up to as sources of information and a place to submit feedback. While I understand that often it is a thankless job, but Craaig knew (or should've known) what the admin position entailed, including the community management and communication aspect. To be honest I think he is the sole cause of his own anger, rather than the community.
Edit:
Ninja'd by naryar
Maybe a new coloured title for troublemakers, with limited posting rights for x amount of time? I'm just throwing ideas out there
-
What colour? Something in my mind is screaming "Chartreuse" (or some other type of green)
-
there's already a limited weight that was used for lra2, sparkey and i think hydro. it's just a gray name that says limited.
-
No I can use it and I don't need to share because it's not something that needs to be shared until all the mods agree on it.
I'm genuinely trying to make a solution for EVERYONE here and improve future situations that may arise meanwhile you lot are making it absolutely BLOOPing infuriating and I'm sick of trying so I'm done.
So you post that you're working on an appeal system, and start crying when people ask about what you mean by that and how it would work. There's basically no reason that I can see to keep something like that secret from the community, and community feedback would be important for this kind of thing, in my view. .
Craaig was frustrated at this point, so he wasn't posting the most sane stuff.
The appeal system as proposed by Craaig was that permabans could be appealed after 6 months of ban, and that we would listen to the appeal, and that the staff would decide to let the banned member come back, with 2 months of "zero tolerance" where we get rid of him permanently if he goes over 50% warning (no more appeals possible, he'd be gone for good).
That was the appeal system.
Now I agree that if we do that for permabans it doesn't make much sense since a permaban is supposed to be permanent.
Yet again, we permabanned andrew because we were all quite frankly sick of his behavior and constant flaming and trolling and sneakily insulting the staff, and it was a good thing at the time.
Right now, circumstances have changed, and as said before I stand by what I've said : I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. However, I will be merciless if he continues his previous behavior.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTlVRUkwYRI
Seriously, if he's this thin-skinned over constructive criticism, he needs to grow up. Yugi, you don't need to apologise at all for what you did.
-
No I can use it and I don't need to share because it's not something that needs to be shared until all the mods agree on it.
I'm genuinely trying to make a solution for EVERYONE here and improve future situations that may arise meanwhile you lot are making it absolutely BLOOPing infuriating and I'm sick of trying so I'm done.
So you post that you're working on an appeal system, and start crying when people ask about what you mean by that and how it would work. There's basically no reason that I can see to keep something like that secret from the community, and community feedback would be important for this kind of thing, in my view. .
Craaig was frustrated at this point, so he wasn't posting the most sane stuff.
The appeal system as proposed by Craaig was that permabans could be appealed after 6 months of ban, and that we would listen to the appeal, and that the staff would decide to let the banned member come back, with 2 months of "zero tolerance" where we get rid of him permanently if he goes over 50% warning (no more appeals possible, he'd be gone for good).
That was the appeal system.
Now I agree that if we do that for permabans it doesn't make much sense since a permaban is supposed to be permanent.
Yet again, we permabanned andrew because we were all quite frankly sick of his behavior and constant flaming and trolling and sneakily insulting the staff, and it was a good thing at the time.
Right now, circumstances have changed, and as said before I stand by what I've said : I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. However, I will be merciless if he continues his previous behavior.
Thanks nar. That system seems pretty reasonable. We keep using the word "permaban" but none of the supposed permabans have actually been permanent, maybe bans of X months or a year should be given instead, since current permabans are basically being ignored?
-
Although I agree that his actions were rather irrational, I would still like to apologize nonetheless. I don't wish to tread on ground I have no right to tread on and I think Naryar has done a good job by clearly explaining what Craaig was proposing.
However, I still stand by the principle that the community should have their say in this to make them feel safe around disruptive members. I have argued for the mods to be able to do things at their discretion before but I see nothing wrong with community input and scrutiny, something which I believe has been handled maturely, without drama, up until Craaig leaving.
@Badger That's exactly what I've been saying and I couldn't agree more. Thanks, Nary.
-
None of the permabans have been permanent ? I noticeably remember TRIAS and Noodle being permabanned, and the forum is very well off without those two.
Judging from the staff appears to have had enough about this whole Andrew drama, I can say Andrew is going towards a permaban as well...
-
Sh** me, Craiig's gone. Wow. I didn't think that this would be what stops him. I mean, I get that I didn't help the situation but... Great. Now I feel terrible. Us lot have literally driven a main member away. I think this forum is well and truly dying, and that isn't me being melodramatic (again), that is the truth. If the members of the forum are driving people away, then what is the point of the forum existing? You know, I remember when I first joined. It was great. Then I went into the chatterbox, and got baited hard by HA and eventually got muted. That's probably why I kinda have a grudge against HA.
No credit to me
-
None of the permabans have been permanent ? I noticeably remember TRIAS and Noodle being permabanned, and the forum is very well off without those two.
Judging from the staff's opinion about banning him, I can say Andrew is going towards a permaban as well...
yes, but so far every member that I can think of that has multiaccounted through a permaban has been allowed to unless they break forum rules again on their 2nd account
-
Just ban everyone for a million years, instead of permanently, then they won't be permabans. I can't believe everyone took this thread 100% seriously.
-
Just ban everyone for a million years, instead of permanently, then they won't be permabans. I can't believe everyone took this thread 100% seriously.
::badidea
-
None of the permabans have been permanent ? I noticeably remember TRIAS and Noodle being permabanned, and the forum is very well off without those two.
Judging from the staff appears to have had enough about this whole Andrew drama, I can say Andrew is going towards a permaban as well...
Noodle made a bunch of alts to spam the forum after he was permabanned, and TRIAS tried to use proxies and got a bunch of people range banned by collateral, at least from what I've read in the archives. Nobody takes a permanent ban as final is what I'm trying to suggest.
-
Those are bad examples though, because they were clear examples of ban evading and were treated as such. Sparkey and Avalanche on the other hand, were allowed back, though only one is still back.
-
Those are bad examples though, because they were clear examples of ban evading and were treated as such. Sparkey and Avalanche on the other hand, were allowed back, though only one is still back.
It doesn't disprove a trend that people don't take permabans seriously here, whether that's through trying to reform through an alt, or just returning to stir sh**. Of the 5 prominent users that I know of that got permabanned, each tried to return in some capacity.
-
ha ****ed my dad, please ban him
-
Well this has turned into quite a mess, hasn't it?
A much bigger deal has been made of all of this than need be. This is all over one person, guys.
I know we aren't always extremely swift in dealing with significant matters, but a lot of that has to do with the fact that there's actually a good handful of us now, who all live in different time zones, work a variety of different hours, many of us are students and part of the work force, and have more going on than just GTM. And in the past month or so we've made a conscious effort to refrain from stepping on each others' toes when dealing with the little stuff, and making sure we're all on relatively the same page with the big stuff. (A lot of this having to do with how much Nary and I used to butt heads) Coordinating all of that takes a chunk of time. In this particular instance, I can take a chunk of the blame for delaying, as I've had a fairly busy 24 hours and they wanted to make sure they had my input.
I'm not sure if anybody's noticed, but I'm not really involved with the day to day operations around here much anymore, I simply don't have the time and I haven't been that involved with the community either. I'm mostly around at this point to weigh in on things behind the scenes.
My point, basically, is these things that have the ability to set a precedent going forward, we need a little time on. Give us a day or two before you start demanding results.
-
This thread got way out of hand, y'all can lock it if you wanna.
-
Well hi there.
Time to set some things straight.
Those that know me personally know everything I do for this forum, I do for it's longevity and the happiness of the userbase as a whole. It's telling to me that those who had 'less than kind' words to say about me are those who do not know me at all.
Last night was evidently not good for me. Middle of my final uni exam period, I had an exam yesterday and had been drinking. I am stressed beyond belief even without this situation; Take that as you will. I'm sorry for my reactions but I'm not apologizing for my viewpoints.
Tom; Don't even worry man. Haven't read your message as of yet but I don't need to honestly, you're a great user who wants whats best for the community, and that's exactly why we got you covering the Tournament section.
Yes, the reason I didn't want to explain the intricacies was because I wanted the staff to be agreed on it being a good idea before we posed it to you guys. If you don't think that's a suitable course of action then we have to agree to disagree. In my opinion, the staff should get the overall say in any community, so if the staff haven't fully agreed on a matter yet, it seems aimless to relay it to the community.
So yeah, back. Again.
News over the actual topic at hand in this thread will come over the next few days after we have had time to discuss at our pace.
-
Well hi there.
Time to set some things straight.
Those that know me personally know everything I do for this forum, I do for it's longevity and the happiness of the userbase as a whole. It's telling to me that those who had 'less than kind' words to say about me are those who do not know me at all.
Last night was evidently not good for me. Middle of my final uni exam period, I had an exam yesterday and had been drinking. I am stressed beyond belief even without this situation; Take that as you will. I'm sorry for my reactions but I'm not apologizing for my viewpoints.
Tom; Don't even worry man. Haven't read your message as of yet but I don't need to honestly, you're a great user who wants whats best for the community, and that's exactly why we got you covering the Tournament section.
Yes, the reason I didn't want to explain the intricacies was because I wanted the staff to be agreed on it being a good idea before we posed it to you guys. If you don't think that's a suitable course of action then we have to agree to disagree. In my opinion, the staff should get the overall say in any community, so if the staff haven't fully agreed on a matter yet, it seems aimless to relay it to the community.
So yeah, back. Again.
News over the actual topic at hand in this thread will come over the next few days after we have had time to discuss at our pace.
Thanks for giving some context. Hopefully your exams are going well.
I don't think anyone was questioning your intentions, which are clearly good.
-
Last night was evidently not good for me. Middle of my final uni exam period, I had an exam yesterday and had been drinking. I am stressed beyond belief even without this situation; Take that as you will.
I honestly figured it was something along those lines (or at least something that stressed you out massively.). I was revising for a IT exam last night (which was today) and I spent 4+ hours trying to go through every possible question that could come up in the paper. Was very tired and was not in a good mood afterwards, which is why I refrained from posting in the thread in case I said something that wasn't well thought out. So I can completely understand where you're coming from.
Tom; Don't even worry man. Haven't read your message as of yet but I don't need to honestly, you're a great user who wants whats best for the community, and that's exactly why we got you covering the Tournament section.
...I can't really think of anything else I can add to that other than a thank you to Yugitom.
-
Well then. This happened.
-
The matter has been resolved.