Too Quick to Ban?

Well I understand what u mean by posting ur comment but I don't think GM is wrong in ur second example Oo If Gm would let everyone post things in wrong sections it would be messy and hard for them to keep track on it. She simply told him to post it in different section, if he will do that then they will probably ban botter. About first thread I don't see any proof that she was account sharing. She said she's going to do that, but that's all. We don't know If she actually did because they said "not now". But maybe there was more evidence and GM decided to take action. But from reading ur post I remember something I didn't say in my other posts. I don't like when GM telling you they won't ban someone who obviously was against rules and broke them because ss is edited. I had situation where my friend wanted to report player who was saying bad things about her (e.g bitch) but GM didn't take action because she edited it ( she took ss when game was in window mode and she was camera calling me so ofc she can't post my face. Probably like every person in this situation she cut it). It's just example I saw many obvious ss where normaly they would get banned but because ss was edited noone took action. I understand you avoid situations where someone trying to make fake ss, but some of these ss are obv not fake but still GM won't do anything because it's edited

 

Okay, so has this thread been concluded, the possible solutions being weighed and formulated .. Or is it still open for discussion?

While on one hand I feel like I wanna add something, there are also parts of me that is saying :

Spoiler: Bill

So I guess, read on only if you feel further feedback is welcomed..?

Spoiler: My 2-cents worth ^.^

First, I need to say that my subsequent comments and suggestions are

• NOT to flame anyone
• NOT to side on any side (I dun like the idea of "siding", but well, juz to say it)
• may not be as comprehensive because I might not have followed each and every other threads (I see people quoting, linking Report Abuse & Ban Appeals), but I'll try my best.

Second, on to my post then.

Spoiler: Now entering my Comments and Suggestions..

Just a little etiqutte so as not to be rude, allow me to respond to the TS :

I hope you are not still feeling that way. Being only a regular member, all I can say to assure you is that, while the number (and quality..?) of the Report Abuse threads may seem to prove your fears, I still do not think you will get banned so easily. If you can recall the T&Cs off-hand, answer to yourself when did you last not abide by them. And, do you reallie feel you might catch yourself in a situation where you, for some reason, will not leave the map you are not ~mapowner of? I'm sure you will always have sufficient time to be able to leave a map before actually reallie getting into a "grey-area bannable offence".


Now, onto wad I wanna add. I see some replies that reallie resonate with me. But before I end up going off topic, lemme juz address my opinion on the subject matter at hand.
I'm sure the proper answer has been given, but I guess juz to reiterate, generally no, I do not think the Staff are too quick.

Spoiler: Too Quick to Ban?

As regular members, are we reallie qualified to make that assumption, or dare I say statement? While I appreciate the Staff sharing publicly some of the discussions behind Staff decisions, but end of the day, I reallie feel they ought to be that : Staff decisions. On one hand it is good for building up trust and having transparency between Staff and Players, but I would also hate it to be a norm (and eventually making it feel like a right..? entitlement..?) that Players always questioning the Staff decisions. Of course I am all for the open discussion, where we learn and improve, and feedback. However, the topic at hand is revolving around Bans. That would mean that someone somewhere had infringed on the rules, gone against the terms and conditions, and thereby a consequence must be handed down. And fortunately, like almost how everywhere which has a Court to issue the punishment also has a means of appeal, there is also a fair and just way here to seek redress, for those that may feel they might have been unjustly treated or prejudicially handled.

Or if I want to put it in another way, I disagree that Staff are too quick to ban because I am trusting that they take their jobs (voluntary work, rather) seriously. While I may not have the proof at hand, I am sure the Staff do not take banning Players lightly - they do not roll a dice, or pick a card when making their decisions. Rather, they think it through (be it individually pondering first, or seeking the other Staff for opinions and judgement) and then come up with the verdict. So with that, is my take on the Staff's decision-making.

As of thus far, I would say I'm still confident in this system. Even if there were to be other occasion(s?) where a person might be prematurely banned (I think I can quote other instances, but I'd rather not for now), apart from that person posting an appeal, I'm pretty sure the Staff have their own way of handling and making sure it does not happen with abandonment (without restraint, I mean). So, sticking to the topic, I think the Staff are "doing" their banning with reasonable justifications.

(i: Yes, I know some are saying the hassle of having to go thru with the appeal when it's a wrongful ban, but I guess that is juz part and parcel of a lot of the things we do..?
ii: If anyone reallie feels I am being ignorant, pls feel free to share with me your thoughts/past Report Abuse or Ban Appeals that I should take note of)

Now, back to where I was saying, here is where I might be going a little away from the topic. However, the issue appears to have been raised quite a few times (in this thread and others..?). So, having answered the topic discussion, I do not feel wrong if I continue a little more here, albeit may not reallie be on topic

Spoiler: Am I still being on topic? Hmm..

So to say again, I like how some people have shared their opinions on the issue of ~mapowner, and they reflect my view as well.
Namely, why is there the need for "non-owners" of maps, to leave the map?
And also, why are the Staff currently being actively involved (by this, I mean responding to ~gm and carrying out actions), since some have pointed out, staying in "another person's" map is not prohibited (yet?) and no part of the agreement states Players agree to leave a map when ~mapowner is done and shows they are not "owners"..?

I'm asking not out of anger or anything, but more out of concern, I guess?
I cannot find a greater argument other than, "any Staff's actions in such situations will definitely create a precedence" - there will undoubtedly be revolutionary changes (assuming it has not already happened). So while at this point in time both the original links TS has shared have been handled appropriately, but based on some of the replies given by Staff, future actions that they may carry out can still be questionable (as in , being in the grey-area questionable and NOT in the sense Players be rude , complain and question ) .

I am still undecided for now , not because I am fickle-minded, but rather more like there are so many variables and uncertainties:
(Assuming ~mapowner allows for complete control)
i) ~mapowner is done, how long should it be for it to be reasonable time for "non-owners" to desert the map?
ii) ~mapowner has been done several times, so if "non-owners" are not allowed to stay in a map, why not make it the default then, instead of having the "mapowner" to gather proof of non-compliance?
iii) Are the logs able to track character movement? If not, then Players have to start SSing their movement into every new map in order to protect themselves from possible false reports?
iv) Players are to declare their intention upon entering a map so as to relieve from any possible wrongdoing?
v) remove and refund all Pet auto-loot, until the fix is updated that will stop Pets from picking other Players' drops?
vi) ~mapowner is done, but "mapowner" is nowhere to be seen. So now have to /find mapowner as a precautionary step to prove that there was a point time "mapowner" left map?

I hope my point is being seen here. While of cuz ~mapowner can be useful, I reallie feel there shud be a limit as to how far/how much it does when we talk abt enforcement. Because reallie, I can go on much further with that list, and it will definitely sound silly (if it does not already appear to be so)

But will this not juz open more cans of worms..?
1) If the AFKer were to come back in time, with him being attack, will he be allowed to defend himself? Or will killing the mobs infringe on the ~mapowner command?
2) Clearly being hit, he will be unable to go to FM. Assuming the portal is far, and he runs out of TP Rocks/Town scrolls, wad are his other options?
3) Talking abt Summon Sacks, wad abt them being summoned in a common popular Map/Town..? I'm not familiar with the exact purpose of the Summon Sack in the first place, but if it were to be opened in a common area, can "non-mapowners" kill them? And if they are opened in a place which is reasonably believed to be vacant, can "non-mapowners" kill them?

(I know I'm giving extreme(?) examples, but, for discussion sake ^.^)

Spoiler: Other considerations not being discussed for now

In addition to everything, this brings us a little to a side topic: Then people not supporting "map selling" have less basis then. ~mapowner gives "mapowner" full rights, free to do wad they want. Notices muz now be clearly stated map selling is not endorsed by the T&Cs, and so Map Buyers are not being protected if they engage is such transactions . But then again, it can result in Players posting in the Report Abuse of "mapowner" scamming , since with enough evidence, scammers can still get punished. But here's the complete twist - Which is predominant : ~mapowner command, or proof of "mapowner" agreeing to sell the map..?

Being related on the main topic of Bans, Verbal Abuse reports (as seen to be raised by some) will unfortunately not have any air time in this post of mine.
Being related on the main topic of Bans, Scam reports are also unable to get any discussion space right now

Spoiler: Epilogue

Well, this shud be the end of my long post. While some may apologise, I dun think I will - that's why I separated them into spoilers, so you could have stopped reading any point..? Haha. I will however, appreciate if you had gone thru the whole of my post ^.^

And, if ever, I were to get banned, I hope I can steal a quote..

 

Has your Friend tried sending the SS thru a private message..? Did they not accept, or she did not wan to do that also, cuz of your privacy?

And, when you say SS, how did she exactly take it..? I thought SS when you are Mapling (even in window mode) will still juz take the game screen. Unless she did a PrntScr..hmm..

 

I would call botting a pretty serious thing. Now for a GM to just say make a correct threat if you want any actions taken. That to me sounds like botting isn't bannable until a formal report is made? I understand that if things were in the wrong section everything would be crazy. However, the post was seen and replied to. Shouldn't some action be taken along with letting the poster know to post in the correct section next time?

And the SS situation I've seen more than half dozen times. I feel like toxic people in the community get away with so much because of that SS rule.

 

Nah she didn't priv msg it because I didn't want even GM to see my weird face I made Also she took PrtSc, so well. Still like MrRebs said just now I'm talking about many diff situations I see hackers or people who crearly break rules go away because people didn't know about not editing ss (like i said earlier noone new read rules at start) and most of people aren't saving not edited pic so hacker/abuser just go free. That's what I assume from reading closed ban appeals which action wasn't taken.

 

Alright, so I'm going to start off with saying that I am thankful for every post in this thread so far, and want to let you all know that we'll be looking extensively at our systems in the near future. I cannot guarantee that everything in this thread will be implements, I cannot guarantee that anything will, but I just want you all to know that we've heard your outcry.

I do feel it necessary to answer one post in particular that was recently posted because I feel as though there are some points made that are fairly incorrect. I am not silencing this person, I am simply pointing out to anyone reading the wrongful judgments that the poster has made and attempting to clarify why things were done the way they were.

I'd like you to provide concrete proof of your claim that specific players always get their requests accepted whereas others do not, as it simply isn't true. Keep in mind that players who use the forums tend to be here often as opposed to people who do not; naturally, if a player is comfortable with the forums, they will be comfortable using it as a medium where they can report others, and players who are not as used to using the forums may not always come forward with proper reports or evidence that allows us to make an informed verdict on a particular scenario. Perhaps this is what you are referring to; oftentimes when a ban is not issued, it is because we cannot be absolutely certain of what actually happened, and this is a learning experience for the player who made the report; we inform them what exactly they need in future, and they more easily understand the rules that we adhere to. A player who has posted many reports will already know these guidelines, a player who is reporting for the first time may not.

So once again, I'd like you to provide actual examples of this bias, because I haven't the faintest idea what you're talking about.

I think that it is undeniable in the posted link that this player deserved to be banned. We were given a very reasonable tip by a player and looked further into the matter. The original ban was issued based off of login records among other things, however when we post in ban appeals we attempt to hide peoples' personal information. On that basis, we did a quick search of the logs and found what this player had said and posted that instead; very obvious, very open and shut, and well, if you're going to attempt to lie to us, expect no sympathy, because we will catch you.

You mention scamming, so I'd like to make it known that we have put in effort into solving cases of scamming in the past. I will draw attention to the following thread:
https://royals.ms/forum/threads/dced-and-lost-items-after-trading.45244/
In this scenario, we have a player who gave items and mesos to another player and paid them to use a Stormcaster Forging Manual, expecting to receive the Stormcaster Gloves in return. This player attempted to keep the items for himself, and furthermore attempted to claim that the items were lost in order to be "refunded" them so that he could give them back to the original player (while also having the same items for himself). The results were that we banned this player for attempting to scam staff of items, however the most important part is this: if this player attempted to keep the items from the original player, it would have definitely and wholly been classified as scamming, and I can wholeheartedly assure anyone reading this that the player would've received another ban for their actions. I do recall other similar situations in which similar situations have occurred and resulted in bans, you're free to do some research and prove my point for me if you so choose.

My point in speaking about this is that we do our fair share of work for every case, not just certain ones as this poster implies. However, no system of logs and policies is perfect, not even our own, and it does often limit our ability to handle scenarios. We do our due diligence, and I simply won't have it said that we do not.

I'd like to request any player who can see the media link that is posted in that thread to come forward and show it to me, as I cannot answer for why this thread was not moved and responded to, but I also do not know anything about this report. If I had to guess, I would say that the video (if that is what the media tags are attempting to bring up) itself was inconclusive and we would have required more information about the situation.

I think that your point here is to state that we care more about the red tape than we do about actually putting away bad players; I think your implication is that we ignored this thread solely because it was not in the right section. I've proposed a reason above that is alternate to that, one that makes much more sense, however like I said I don't actually know as I cannot see the media. What I will do instead is post this link for your attention:
https://royals.ms/forum/threads/reporting-iviessi-for-ks-ing.55160/
In this thread, we see a player being reported for killstealing. However, going through the screenshots, we found ourselves with the point that the mapowner in the entire thread of screenshots never once asked the killstealer to leave the map. Because of this, we could not ban for killstealing, however we did discuss the situation and find another justified reason to ban the player as we came to the conclusion that the player was being malicious. My point in raising this thread as an example is to express to anyone reading that our red tape exists for a reason but we do still always have the intent to do away with negative members of the community, and we do always work towards that end whenever possible.

Again you've mentioned that we are biased towards certain players, so again I will ask you to bring forward concrete evidence of this bias. If you can prove to me that we have made any action with regards to game moderation based solely off of who the reporting player was, if you can prove to me that any rule was bent for one player and not another, I will completely concede to you.

As it stands, we are grateful for every opinion brought forward in this thread so far, and I will be working extensively with the rest of staff to decide if any changes need to be made to our current staff, policies and Terms and Conditions. Thank you all for your continued interest and support in making this server as great as it can be.

 

Thank you so much for your reply Michael. I see your examples and I understand all arguments have their flaws. I see you do try your best to get all the bad guys, but some bad guys will get away. That's just how life works. Now when I'm sharing this with everyone please understand that I AM IN NO WAY ATTACKING YOU GMS. I am just sharing what I as a player as well as many others have come to notice. You ask me to use an example so I will use myself as an example than. Yesterday I was banned for 7 days for harassment. I'd like to start by saying that I AM NOT ASKING FOR AN APPEAL. I smegaed "Who's the most disliked person on the server?" followed by "Votes are in. iChu has won". To some this many be considered harassment. To many others it seemed like it wasn't enough to be harassment. However it's a very fine line. Over the past couple weeks I've seen other players go on rampages smegaeing about her and they've gotten warnings before their ban. I was banned within 5 minutes without warning for 2 smega's. I ALSO HAVE SS FROM iCHU HERSELF SAYING IN SKYPE THAT MY BAN WAS NOT HER DECISION IT WAS THE GM'S. Immediately following my ban, iChu felt the need to contact my guild master and tried to make me sound like a bad person and get me kicked out of Ohana. Now I'm not saying I want her banned at all! All I want (and I think many others) is just a little more professionalism with issues involving friends of gms

 

I think you shouldn't blame GM in ur situation Oo look what u said and think about it again. You smega to whole server "Who's the most disliked person on the server?" and said it's iChu. Sorry but if it would be about me I would feel offended and I'm sure iChu did. Banning it's not our decisions so idk what's the point saying : "iCHU HERSELF SAYING IN SKYPE THAT MY BAN WAS NOT HER DECISION " because she has nothing to say. GM made right move and you should think before smega something even for fun. I'm sure you wouldn't be happy someone smega something like that about you. So no matter what other people were smega earlier and if the were getting warnings or not, you should think before posting something like that because it's 100% harassment. Being friends with GM has nothing to do with it, I would ban you as well if I would be GM without knowing iChu (I don't know her for real). And believe me GMs bannig people they are friends with if they are against rules, I remember few of these bans so instead blaming GM for fast decision face the fact your smega deserve it.

 

I believe for it to be considered harassment someone must feel harassed? There was no report on the forums about it nor any indication from iChu saying she was offended. If there was, she just told a GM friend and the GM took action immediately which is understandable. HOWEVER, if you're going to sit here and tell me that if some random person found a GM sitting in FM and someone was harassing them and they asked GM for help. What would the GM say? "Go post in report abuse section". This is the special treatment I'm talking about.

 

She didn't have to tell GM about it I'm sure Gm saw ur smega and banned you right away, you know GM see smega as well most of the time report is not needed for smega bans

 

This thread is not here to discuss your own ban nor is it here for you to accuse GMs of something they haven't done. I've asked earlier in this thread for people to remain on topic and I will do so again.

If you have any problems with your ban then feel free to make a ban appeal, keep it out of this thread though.

 

With all due respect I even said I'm not trying to attack you guys. I even mentioned I don't want an appeal. Michael asked for an example and I gave him one. This whole threat is about GM's too quick to ban. Isn't that the topic of my example? I haven't even gone off topic.

 

Mike didn't ask for an example from what I can see, he asked for concrete evidence of the bias you have mentioned, which is not something you have provided so far. All you have mentioned so far is your own ban for 7 days which isn't even the case, it's a 3 day ban for harassment followed by a 3 day ban for ban evading. Both of those bans you are to blame for, not the GMs nor the player you aimed the smega at.

 

If we are online and see smega harassment, or someone ~gms that they are getting harassed, we dont need a formal report. Why would we when we are witnessing it for ourselves. Take for example Peopeo. He was banned on the spot for using harassing smegas. Also, stop lying. There was a notice to stop the smega drama and you continued to smega harass. (ie: in this targetted negativity in a public way) It wasn't too quick at all and maybe you should think before posting such unnecessary negativity. Secondly, they do not have to report it for it to be considered harassment. We can read smegas and decide if it is toxic and targeted enough to be considered harassment without the victim's opinion. Just because iChu didn't report it doesn't mean it's okay for you to say those kinds of things. And who knows, maybe she was upset about it and would have reported you anyway, we just took action immediately because it was absolutely uncalled for and toxic. So stop bringing up your ban in this thread please. You were banned for what you did. Nothing more, nothing less and it wasn't too quick at all. We were just there to witness it so it was taken care of immediately.

 

Well you try and throw your 2 cents in and you just get attacked. Oh well. Hopefully someday something'll happen to open your eyes. Until that day I guess I'll just wait and see what happens.

 

I don't know what you're talking about. I've gone and personally handled harassment ~gms and if I noticed anything that was harassing I have told them to stop. If they didn't, they were banned for harassment, but people usually stop when I ask them to. The only reason we ask for a report is probably because we didn't see the messages in person and therefor require proof that there were indeed harassing messages.

We asked for where there was bias and you have only given your ban as an example. Your ban has 0 bias because what you did was wrong. Therefore, we are clarifying that there was no bias and that your statement is invalid. You haven't even bothered bringing up other examples so I really don't see where you're going with this.

 

It's very hard to prove intention. Although a GM may not literally type "look what I'm doing for you" doesn't mean their actions aren't affected by their personal relationship with one of the players. You must understand that I'm just a single player. I don't have nearly the amount of resources at my disposal as you GMs/Admins.

With all that said I think we've all said our fair share on the topic. I only wanted to bring it to your attention. I wanna thank each player and each GM/Admin for their reply and input. I agree with the flaws you pointed out in my argument and I realize you all do try you best. However I also hope you at least took something from my argument as well. Thank you all for you time Have wonderful day/night!

 

All this thread has tough me is i can get people banned for afking on my map.

In all seriousness da heck is wrong with you gm's that is the most stupid reason to ban refusal to cc... refusal to change channels.

actually no this is sweet... I shall get owner of the free market and report everyone for being on my map when i told them to cc and by right of the rules as you have stated you will have to give 50 odd people a ban for now following the order of the map owner. pathetic.