[happy]

I have to agree with Laced he didn't receive any warnings and was skipped to a mute. IMO that isn't fair no matter how long someone here shouldn't determine how harsh a punishment is or shouldn't be.

[matt_st3 (Strongrule)]

The particular punishment is not the topic of the thread

[VolfVoss]

Judging by this rough draft, I was unfairly muted.

In accordance with this rough draft it could be argued that your 3 day mute was unfair. 

Let's humor your situation for a moment though:

You've been a part of this community since May 2018 (in accordance with forums) and are a former TTT staff member. 

You've played over 2400 hours on Gmod which I'd say a large portion is part of the Dinkleberg's community.

I think it's more than adequate to say you're familiar with the rules of the community. 

I know you're familiar with the rules, because after posting your racial slur it was deleted. 

Now, should someone who has so much experience in the community that decides to KNOWINGLY violate a rule be treated just like a brand new player who doesn't know any different?

That is the real complexity of circumstances presented. 

I was the one who Muted you for the 3 days, I felt it was still a very minor punishment for someone with so much experience in the community.  It's nothing personal, I'd expect the same if not worse done to me if I had done such a thing. 

Moral of the story, keep such things in DM's and away from the community. 

Luckily, there's legitimate guidelines coming out to prevent such incidents from happening again. 

Except you wouldn't have muted a brand new player for 3 days. Why are they treated as if they're babies and "they don't know any better?" Seems like I'm being treated differently just because I'm supposed to know the rules, which is unfair in my eyes.
 

I have to agree with Laced he didn't receive any warnings and was skipped to a mute. IMO that isn't fair no matter how long someone here shouldn't determine how harsh a punishment is or shouldn't be.

You're both correct that this could be unfair, it is unfair one might say to expect members of the community to look at the rules in a hope to not break them; and it may also be unfair to hope that members of the community wouldn't willingly break rules for kicks and giggles.  

You're both correct that Laced was not warned for violating a rule that he knew to be in place. 

The overall purpose of the original thread is to create a sort of education for actions. 

You violate a rule, here are the punishments that could be dealt to you. 

Again, my thread is NOT the actual punishment list. It was a brain child that I had and I wanted feed back on it for discussion, To weigh in on peoples perspectives of lenient and strict.

And I've obviously caused this thread to digress from it's original purpose, for that I apologize. 

I apologize Laced for not giving you a warning and jumping straight to a mute. 

[lacer]

In all honesty I posted that first thing as a meme, but I figured with your response to it, I'd talk about it a bit more. Apologies for derailing the thread.

[happy]

Just to clarify on my post I know avi is planning on writing them I don't know how far along she's gotten or what she plans to put for them, but my post was meant for all potential lists not just Voss'. I wanted to express my dislike of the idea of someone's time in the community being taken into account with punishment. IMO that would be like on one of our servers if a reg was to mic spam or break another rule as a joke instead of issuing warnings we skipped to punishments. So I just wanted my two cents taken into consideration (I believe Lace's punishment was a valid example of such actions tying it to the topic of this thread since this is a suggestion/ideas thread)

[Foxka]

Staff discretion is the worst thing to ever come into the punishment guidelines. Remove it. having baseline punishments will help prevent abuse and also prevent unhealthy cliques from forming, so the same people don't get around the rules.

[RussEfarmer]

As some previous people said, staff discretion should only be involved when actually IDENTIFYING a rule break, not administering a punishment. If you get too topsy-turvey with the way you do things for specific people, you get into the grounds of unfair punishments for other people, which turns into an entire ordeal to sort out with those involved. A quote from the nopleez appeal sums it up pretty well:

My question is (for anyone), since im not worried that the same shit would happen because it will, why? What changed, or why does one person get special privilege after 30 something bans when we perma ban people for throwing an incend into a crowd? We keep people banned for all sorts of actually unimportant things and yet when it comes to conduct in the community ...