[poop MANIAC(fecal frenzy!!!!!!!!]

Hello all, this is a discussion thread about creating a standard of practice which would allow users to appeal cooldowns on unban requests. Whether you believe such a system is necessary and important or banal and beneath consideration, I want to help facilitate the expression of where we stand on this topic as a community. I have recently been told that there is no such system in place, and so would like to make this discussion without the resource demand and procedure of a formal inquiry.

My argument is thus: In cases where an individual feels that the judgements rendered regarding the exponentially stacking cooldown on unban requests, I believe that;  in order to allow for maximum fairness and due equity to all aggrieved parties, a procedure for the appeals process which would allow for players who feel as though they have a justified position for being allowed the standard appeal time to present their cases and allow for a greater degree of interplayer transparency.  With greater time increments between posts I feel that introspection and discussion on a ban in question will be stifled, and lessons learned may be lessons lost to time and forgotten, bereft of the mental reinforcement from careful study and consideration, and so there should be a process by which these cooldowns may be formally contested.


I hope to hear back from my fellow gamers so that I might see angles which I am not considering regarding this topic, ideally to refine and reform it but also to debunk it as necessary.

[RussEfarmer]

appealma balls

[lacer]

transparency

[Zenful]

-cut-
With greater time increments between posts I feel that introspection and discussion on a ban in question will be stifled, and lessons learned may be lessons lost to time and forgotten, bereft of the mental reinforcement from careful study and consideration, and so there should be a process by which these cooldowns may be formally contested. -cut-

I'm going to ask about the part in read mainly.

I mean, it's hard to stop a thread from blowing up, take the toxicity in the community thread for example. The unban requests, I don't remember the specifics of who they were, had a lot of blow up. Some woh would come back and appeal when the community cooled and in some cases it worked and others eh, not so much. If I'm missing your meaning inform me but I don't think that it's necessarily the community that is the problem when unbans are made, it's what they bring up when arguing their unban.

[poop MANIAC(fecal frenzy!!!!!!!!]

-cut-
With greater time increments between posts I feel that introspection and discussion on a ban in question will be stifled, and lessons learned may be lessons lost to time and forgotten, bereft of the mental reinforcement from careful study and consideration, and so there should be a process by which these cooldowns may be formally contested. -cut-

I'm going to ask about the part in read mainly.

I mean, it's hard to stop a thread from blowing up, take the toxicity in the community thread for example. The unban requests, I don't remember the specifics of who they were, had a lot of blow up. Some woh would come back and appeal when the community cooled and in some cases it worked and others eh, not so much. If I'm missing your meaning inform me but I don't think that it's necessarily the community that is the problem when unbans are made, it's what they bring up when arguing their unban.

It's not a problem with the community, I am simply proposing a procedure which would allow players who feel they haven't had a fair shake contend the decision, and for further elaboration on a denied request to be submitted.

[Zenful]

-cut-
With greater time increments between posts I feel that introspection and discussion on a ban in question will be stifled, and lessons learned may be lessons lost to time and forgotten, bereft of the mental reinforcement from careful study and consideration, and so there should be a process by which these cooldowns may be formally contested. -cut-

-cut-

It's not a problem with the community, I am simply proposing a procedure which would allow players who feel they haven't had a fair shake contend the decision, and for further elaboration on a denied request to be submitted.

OK, I see. The main problem with that is that kind of detracts from the idea that it's a community votes oaths kind of stuff. Look at the rice bowls/azunaricewhatever forgot their name. The community didn't want her back and in the replies you can tell they got discouraged by not receiving a fair shake. The community may not seem fair but the community votes on what they think is right. If it's more of something that can be handled with staff, take for instance someone doing something that one person in the community didn't like and got banned for it I could see that. But this seems kinda niche for some protocol to be in place.

[poop MANIAC(fecal frenzy!!!!!!!!]

-cut-
With greater time increments between posts I feel that introspection and discussion on a ban in question will be stifled, and lessons learned may be lessons lost to time and forgotten, bereft of the mental reinforcement from careful study and consideration, and so there should be a process by which these cooldowns may be formally contested. -cut-

-cut-

It's not a problem with the community, I am simply proposing a procedure which would allow players who feel they haven't had a fair shake contend the decision, and for further elaboration on a denied request to be submitted.

OK, I see. The main problem with that is that kind of detracts from the idea that it's a community votes oaths kind of stuff. Look at the rice bowls/azunaricewhatever forgot their name. The community didn't want her back and in the replies you can tell they got discouraged by not receiving a fair shake. The community may not seem fair but the community votes on what they think is right. If it's more of something that can be handled with staff, take for instance someone doing something that one person in the community didn't like and got banned for it I could see that. But this seems kinda niche for some protocol to be in place.

That's fair. Being in a position where I find that I'm in need of just such a protocol myself I may be biased toward a system which may have lower demand than I realize; However, I fail to see the harm in allowing such a process to be formalized, as I believe it will serve to make the bureaucracy more adaptable.

[TheUltraFish]

Nicol told me to deny and close this with the statement, "bans to appeals aren't appealable."

I suggest you wait the proper time like everyone else.