Standardized ban time

[Thebluedash]

I have noticed how some of our bans can be rather inconsistent. Perhaps, we should have a standardized ban time?

Ex.

(Not actual time I'm recommending just trying to explain what I'm talking about.)

Chat spam = 2 weeks

A second rule breach would be double the time

and a third rule breach is just a permament ban.

Of course, cases can vary and we may not be following this at all times, but I do think something like this would be useful to have here.. Thoughts?

 

[Hop_Hoppington-Hoppenhiemer]

This is a good idea. Hop would like to see more specfic changes, though..

 

[Grudgeman1706]

I've been wanting to make a ban time thread. But I believe one the other star told me it would be a bad idea. So I dropped it, never the less I support this

 

[Thebluedash]

This is a good idea. Hop would like to see more specfic changes, though..

Well, what I'm thinking is we can come up with specific ban times for common type of rules that are broken and put it on a page for reference. We can also use the concept of doubling the length of which ever rule they broke if it's their 2nd time of rule breaking, and if the person break a rule a third time it should just be a permanent ban.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, we should generally strive for a very strict banning system, and to quickly permanently get rid of serious rule-breakers. Given how controversial this wiki is, and how massive amount of work that it takes to take care of, it is the only way to keep it somewhat manageable.

CrossverseCrisis has shouldered a large part of this responsibility in the past, but he has been very tired lately, so it is extremely important that the rest of the admins strive towards being very strict in his stead, or the wiki will quickly start to become considerably more unmanageable.

Basically, we do not have the luxury to be lenient, and the most important thing is that the wiki continues to function properly.

That said, we have to evaluate on a case-by-case basis, as people who have contributed a lot/been useful to the wiki should obviously be more likely to get a warning than the ones who immediately start to insert false information into profiles as soon as they come here.

In addition, if we make official banning time rules, this opens us up for two bad options:

If we set the banning time bars too low to be practical, people will become encouraged to take their chances to break the rules, and refer to our regulations if they get higher bans, forcing us to concede.

If we set the bars high, where they should preferably be, we will lose flexibility, and open up the wiki for public criticism, due to the fact that other wikis are usually less strict, since they are far less controversial, and as such can afford to be.

 

[Hop_Hoppington-Hoppenhiemer]

^

This, so much

 

[Faisal_Shourov]

I got something

• Profile vandalism

1st attempt: warning

2nd attempt: 1 week ban

3rd attempt: perma (those who gotta listen would've listened by second time)

Attempts are for each separate edit on profiles

• Harassment, insult

1st accusation: request to avoid user/avoid thread

2nd accusation: warning

3rd accusation: 1 week ban

4th accusation: perma ban

(each accusation is for a single cause only, not from several people for a single cause)

• Insulting staff

1st attempt: warning

2nd attempt: 1 month ban (should be enough)

3rd attempt: perma ban

 

[Antvasima]

I have updated my post above. Please read it. This does not seem to be a good idea at all to me.

 

[Thebluedash]

@Faisal To be honest, those ban times are way too lenient. Vandalism should get 1 warning at best, Second time should be at least a 1 month ban (Honestly should actually be more than this). Harassment should get a ban after the first warning if they continue it. 1 week is also too little. Maybe 2 weeks. Insulting a staff should have the same ban time as harassment. We don't want to seem biased now do we? Can you explain "request to avoid thread" to me? Don't think I even know what that is.

 

[Hop_Hoppington-Hoppenhiemer]

Can you explain "request to avoid thread" to me? Don't think I even know what that is.

ask the user to not post on the thread they caused that offense on

 

[Ryukama]

I may sound too harsh, but if someone actually vadilizes a page (not just wrong stats. Like straight up removing all the content or placing nonsense/spam) I wouldn't be opposed to giving them a perma no warning.

 

[Thebluedash]

@Ryuama Mmm I wanted to say that, but I didn't want to sound too harsh.

 

[Faisal_Shourov]

@Faisal To be honest, those ban times are way too lenient. Vandalism should get 1 warning at best, Second time should be at least a 1 month ban (Honestly should actually be more than this). Harassment should get a ban after the first warning if they continue it. 1 week is also too little. Maybe 2 weeks. Insulting a staff should have the same ban time as harassment. We don't want to seem biased now do we? Can you explain "request to avoid thread" to me? Don't think I even know what that is.

Well some users might have a problem with particular fanbase so they could be requested to avoid discussion threads if there's any friction. And yeah it's too lenient but Ant says we have some reputation so I tried to be as soft. But vandals shouldn't be tolerated

However Ant doesn't like this whole idea so I don't know if anything will happen...

 

[Grudgeman1706]

Antvasima is right, as much as a official Ban rule page would be neat and useful in theory, but ants reasonings pretty much debunk the idea almost entirely, and after further thinking are method right now works fine, we the staff all agree on a consensus for punishments on rule breakers and it's worked fine, we just have to be a little more stricter with rule breakers. And enforce these rules a little more.

 

[Antvasima]

I agree with Ryukama. Again, as somebody who has actually monitored most of the edits in this wiki for a long time, we cannot afford to not be very strict.

Othervise people will become encouraged to insert whatever statistics that they want into the profiles, and behave extremely badly towards each other and the staff.

 

[Hop_Hoppington-Hoppenhiemer]

That's a better idea. Even if they don't understand.

We should treat people like adults and they should come into a wiki understanding rules and formats and the reasons behind them. We can't always afford to break down what they did wrong and how to fix it.

 

[Ryukama]

Of course if they are innocent yet new and do not have a understanding of the Tiering System/Editing Rules yet, we should be lenient.

But if someone deletes everything from a page, puts stuff like "jhfvuye" or "******** Tier," adds inappropriate pictures, etc. I think they'd be best to not have on the site.

 

[Thebluedash]

Hm alright opinions seems to be settled. No ban page it is. However, by all staff agreeing you mean arguing with eachother until they get just the right ban time? Grudge? Well anyways closing.