I had this discussion with a mod or two back in the day, but I always wondered what the community thought. This second chance would be awarded to banned players who present a ban appeal wishing to continue to play the server who have committed crimes that did not cause harm to the overall server in terms of economy or playability. This means crimes such as duping or server crashing/map crashing (on purpose) would not be granted this second chance. My philosophy that I gained from the first admin that I worked for is that if a player presents an appeal it means that they do want to play the server. The conditions would be no third chance, and if they are caught breaking rules again they would be permanently banned. Their character would be deleted and they would have to start over. I understand the main case against this, and that is that the staff wishes to enforce a no tolerance policy, where if you are caught that is that. I understand this, and it is important to keep an image, but it is also important to keep players around and/or gain new players. When I last argued this, it was argued against me that people would take advantage of the server and hack a ton. I personally disagree, since this makes zero sense considering your character would be deleted so it wouldn't matter anyway. Also, this server seems to have a hard time understanding intent of people, and refuses to understand that understanding intent is not difficult. If a hacker made a very poor appeal, which could be poorly worded or a joke, they do not have to be given a second chance. Not everything has to be one way or the other. You can have leeway guys! Before anyone replies, agree or disagree, please think about it for a short while before just posting one or the other. Also please include thought out arguments and not a poorly written or short response. Thank you and remember to keep this on a serious yet light note, there is no reason to get angry!
IMO: No, banned is banned. I guess if i had to explain why i believe that, would be because GM's don't just ban anyone for nothing. You do something, you pay for it.
Imo This severely degrades the integrity of players' first playthroughs, especially those in lower levels. If you have leniency to do whatever you want to so long as it does not affect the overall server status, you're going to have a lot more first jobbers trying out fast-attack and mob vac just for shits and giggles. This results in greater resources spent on admin end to halt the increased hacking, as WELL as increased time wasted sorting through the magnitudes greater number of ban appeals that will inevitably follow. TBH I don't even like the time the admin side is having to spend atm just to keep the server stable. The more time they have to work on fixing quests/PQs, features such as alliance, importing ToT and magatia, etc, the better.
I don't think these are the kind of 'players' we want to attract. Players can stay in this server for as long as they like if they don't hack, so it's up to them if they want to be a part of this community. It's not an admin's choice to ban them (or not) if it was the hacker's prerogative to abuse of the server. People who tend to abuse don't care about their characters being deleted. That's why they do it. All these noobs getting auto-banned make their characters to see if they can get away with it, and it would only make it harder for GMs to have to ban people a second time when they could've been over it the first time. So in this sense I don't see the point in your logic. In addition, would you like most of the old hackers (and everyone else who's been perma-banned) back? Seems to me like if we give current hackers a second chance, well those perma-banned should be allowed back in too!
I personally agree with this. I was just thinking that several minutes ago, as someone got banned in the forums for just trolling/insulting or maybe some offensive words. I honestly didn't like it at all, he was banned a few seconds after he said peace or something like that. I felt he should be WARNED first, and then a ban. And I know he should have read the rules but yeah.. Just my opinion, no bashing me please.
I'm not convinced this should extend to hacking, which is a very deliberate offence, but I'm all for more contextually aware punishments for some cases. I'm not convinced that a second chance appeal is really required, but eh, I've seen it work well elsewhere.
I think you'll have to consider the reasons why the staff may have insisted on no 2nd chances in the first place. Perhaps, it's to serve as a very strong deterrent to serious offences like hacking and duping. If this deterrent was weakened, as some have said earlier, it'll definitely cause an increase in the number of ban appeals EVEN if said hacker isn't really invested in his character. And more unnecessary ban appeals = more unnecessary work for the staff, and for what? A bunch of people who don't even deserve this effort since what they did was destructive, not constructive to the server. Some of them might even be cocky about it, and that's definitely not the outcome we are seeking for. I understand if it's to give more leeway to those who are genuinely sorry for what they did, but maybe these hackers should have thought more carefully before they hacked in the first place? There's really no good reason to give them a second chance, for that poor decision they made. Humans make mistakes, and part of learning from your mistake is accepting the consequences. A permanent ban in this case prevents them from playing, but they'll finally learn to take their decision making seriously and not be tempted to cheat. There is absolutely no good reason to hack, at all. That being said, there can be more room for contextual, case by case discretion for other less major offences that are still being dished out with a perma ban.
I think most of us agree on permabans being permabans and not perma-until-you-ask-for-a-second-chance-ban. But I feel like the deterrent argument is a little... dated. I might be going a little off-topic here but the argument that "harsh punishments act as deterrents to crime" is a concept that has been discredited numerous times. One of the custom RoyalTips literally is "Warnings are not given out prior to bans so please familiarize yourself with the ToS." If that's not warning enough, I don't know what is.
When you do something you regret doing, you really want a second chance to set things right and try again. I'm not going to get a second chance for doing some things which I regret, and I can accept that. If I was given a second chance, I would feel indebted to them but I can understand why said people may not give me a second chance (I broke their trust and hurt them), and so would not ask for one. Second chances should be given rarely, it should not be the standard - is my opinion. People should acquaint themselves with the rules. An error in judgement which has not caused a serious harm and had little malicious intent (e.g. a faux pas) should be given a second chance. Something done with malicious intent should be punished, and whether or not that person is forgiven should be left to those who are responsible for the environment. (If A did something unacceptabe in person B's house I would not intervene to help person A. I would intervene on the side of person B and make sure he does not do anything that he may later regret, which on the surface may seem like I'm assisting person A). People who do not acquaint themselves with the rules shouldn't be treated with leniency at all. If you go to Singapore and start selling drugs because it was fine and tolerated in Amsterdam and feel its unfair to be receiving the death penalty because you didn't know the laws - tough shit. It was your responsibility to know about the rules and customs before you joined. A no tolerance policy encourages people to think more about their actions and how it impacts others as they know a harsh punishment will be waiting for them if they act carelessly. Of course, someone who is intent on breaking rules will not be deterred by said rules. It's more of a rant, sorry it's not well structured or clear. I may clarify things and back up my position later if someone challenges it.
Second chances have known to be given. Implementing a "policy" a la OP's suggestion is rather unnecessary, IMO.
I really shouldn't have worded it that way. This policy does not have to be publicly advertised to every single person joining, just something that the staff keeps in mind if a player shows genuine interest that they want to continue playing. Also, again, for people who "don't care" and will just hack anyway because they now can, they still can't. They will be banned. They will have to start over. If they hack again they would just be banned again. I do agree however that a major downside of this is taking up more time of the GMs, though it seems like the autoban does most of the work on the hacking bans. Perhaps I am wrong on that, but that is just what I've noticed.
