Regarding bans

[Fiel]

In the past few months, there have been a few bannings which have caused a bit of a ruckus on the boards. What constitutes a permanent ban? What constitutes a temporary ban? What is an "Autoban"? When is ban evasion truly occuring, and when is a member just trying to contact an admin?

I will clear a lot of things up and make the process simpler and easier for moderators and users alike. There will be new rules here and a lot of restatement for old rules:

First of all, there are four types of banning used at Southperry:

1. Temporary Ban - This is a ban that occurs when you reach 7 points for the first time. After being put on temporary ban, all of your previous infractions will be overturned and you are given a clean slate to try this whole forum thing again. If you receive another 7 points on an account that has already been temporary banned, you will receive a permanent ban. Note that if you have never reached 7 points before and you cause a string of violations that total up to 14 points, you will jump straight to a permenent ban and not go through the temporary ban process.

The purpose of a temporary ban is that you lose access to the account, not access to the forums. If you would like to create another account for the sole purpose of posting without causing any problems, I see no issue with it. Please contact a staff member regarding your creation of another account so we can be mindful of your current posts. A moderator will create a post in the moderator forum regarding your new account. Any infractions you receive on your new account will be applied to your old account. If a moderator finds that you have not notified us about you creating a new account, points are doubled for all infractions.

2. Permanent Ban - To reiterate, a permanent ban is placed on an account, not on a person. If an account is permanently banned, you can still create another account and I see no issue with it. The punishment in this case is losing the account permanently with no hopes of regaining it.

3. Ban on Sight - This type of ban is one in which moderators are encouraged to ban anyone associated with a previous account. A "Ban on Sight" affects the person and not the account. Any account that we find associated with the person is permanently banned with no hopes of reobtaining the account. A Ban on Sight is only for serious offenses to the site, such as blatant disregard for the rules or becoming a constant nuisance. There have been users of this forum which used to be a Ban on Sight but have since returned to normal posting. The user in this case must contact an administrator or moderator and state that he or she is a sufficiently changed person and would like to post again. It is strongly recommended that you don't betray this trust.

4. IP Ban - An IP ban means that your IP will never be able to connect to the website because it's blocked from the server's firewall. Usually an IP Ban and Ban on Sight go together hand in hand.

Type of Ban	What does it ban?
Temporary Ban	Account
Permanent Ban	Account
Ban on Sight	Person
IP Ban	Person

The purpose of using this light moderation system is to give the user every chance possible to do well as a poster on Southperry. This also gives the administration as many opportunities as possible to state what we believe to be generally poor forum behavior and for users to recognize what it means to be a good poster.

------

When is ban evasion truly occuring, and when is a member just trying to contact an admin?

There are no rules for ban evasion for a reason. It is very difficult to evade a ban given that bans are applied to accounts, not people. A ban evasion can only be the result of evading the Ban on Sight and IP Ban above, and this ban evasion results in a permanent ban for past transgressions.

Since many banned users want to contact adminstrators and moderators to get more information about their ban, I have enabled private messaging for banned users so they can do this. This is more fair for the banned user so that he or she knows what he did was wrong, or for a user to fight a ban and it be considered an unjust ban. This also means that banned users do not have to create a mult just to talk to administration.

------

What is an "Autoban"?

An autoban is generally considered to be 7 points which triggers a temporary ban. The rules and regulations will be updated to show points instead of showing "Autoban" so that this is more clear.

------

Bans and IRC

The IRC channel is considered separate from the forum. If you are banned on the forum, you are not also banned from the IRC channel. Considering the recent changes to the forum moderation policy on bans, the IRC channel is not the place for forum disputes. Leave IRC disputes on IRC, and leave forum disputes on the forum.

[Eos]

Since I know this is going to be asked by someone who only skimmed this I may as well get it out now -

Since bans are primarily account specific, not person specific, what value do they have as a deterrent to abusive users?

IE: if all I have to deal with is the inconvenience of a new account every 14 points, why do I care about the points I'm wracking up?

[Turtally]

Since I know this is going to be asked by someone who only skimmed this I may as well get it out now -

Since bans are primarily account specific, not person specific, what value do they have as a deterrent to abusive users?

IE: if all I have to deal with is the inconvenience of a new account every 14 points, why do I care about the points I'm wracking up?

A Ban on Sight is only for serious offenses to the site, such as blatant disregard for the rules or becoming a constant nuisance.

They get a Ban on Sight.

[Eos]

They get a Ban on Sight.

And you'll note that itty bitty tiny important bit was buried in 13 paragraphs of "there are no consequences". Hence my comment on skimming.

[Grag]

I was discussing with BD on IRC last night. He also agreed with me that posting pornography (by your standards of the word 'porn') shouldn't result in a permanent ban. Is this still in effect? Also, am I able to post in the forums without getting banned left and right? Because I honestly can't tell if I am being banned-on-sight or perma-banned, because a certain admin has been banning me when I try to post (even when I try to not cause a ruckus . . .) Because I believe my 2nd alt, Kawasari Mimoto was banned unfairly, as I was doing nothing wrong in accordance with the regulations of the message board.

[Dual]

Just fyi, Katie was drunk when she was banned. I told her to send you a PM to discuss it, since I personally feel she shouldn't get perma'd for being drunk on New Years. A temp ban definitely would be needed though.

[Grag]

Just fyi, Katie was drunk when she was banned. I told her to send you a PM to discuss it, since I personally feel she shouldn't get perma'd for being drunk on New Years. A temp ban definitely would be needed though.

What she did was no different than me, which is why I think it shouldn't be a perma at all, regardless of whether she was drunk or not. Reasoning behind that is porn isn't technically harmful to the site owners, or the site, as much as the viewing users (which may be minors). A forum is too strict if users can get perma banned by posting a couple nipple-slips (whether it's drunken or purposely).

[Eos]

A forum is too strict if users can get perma banned by posting a couple nipple-slips (whether it's drunken or purposely).

Don't try and make it sound like either of you were punished for mere nipple slips when you both posted approximations of full penetration.

Fiel already stated the items identified as "autoban" should be re-read as "7 point infraction".

If Porn isn't wanted here, that's the administrations right to say it won't be tolerated. It's quite harmful to the site if it becomes so prevalent that SP begins filtered or people stop coming because they can't feel safe they're not going to hit a wall of porn that may get they in trouble. This is a maplestory extract site after all, you shouldn't have to worry about avoiding potential porn here.

[Grag]

Don't try and make it sound like either of you were punished for mere nipple slips when you both posted approximations of full penetration.

Fiel already stated the items identified as "autoban" should be re-read as "7 point infraction".

If Porn isn't wanted here, that's the administrations right to say it won't be tolerated. It's quite harmful to the site if it becomes so prevalent that SP begins filtered or people stop coming because they can't feel safe they're not going to hit a wall of porn that may get they in trouble. This is a maplestory extract site after all, you shouldn't have to worry about avoiding potential porn here.

You're right. But I never said they shouldn't get banned for it. I just stated my opinion that it shouldn't be a permanent one. Because a person can learn from their mistake(s). Regardless, nipple-slips or full-penetration, they're both considered as porn. So why do you care? We both still got banned for it, so it's technically the same. -shrug-

[Eos]

Also, am I able to post in the forums without getting banned left and right?

Your bans have already been adjusted per the newly posted rules.

[Katie ♥]

I agree what I did was wrong and shouldn't of been posted. I have no excuses for what I did and I apologize for that. I don't think at the time I thought that picture would get me a perma ban because I didn't think it was a horrible and graphic picture. It wasn't penetration to another human being. At first I got a temp ban for 10 days then it was changed to perma... either way I deserved a ban of some sorts.

[Eos]

\At first I got a temp ban for 10 days then it was changed to perma...

Yours was put back to 10 when Khoi's was.

[Katie ♥]

Yours was put back to 10 when Khoi's was.

Thank you. And I apologize again for posting that picture.

[Grag]

Yours was put back to 10 when Khoi's was.

Thank you very much, I realized what was done cannot be altered, however, I did learn from it. Thanks for reconsidering your options as an entire staff.

[Fiel]

I've merely closed topics for nip slips. I've never, ever banned someone for a nip slip - those things happen.

[Kawasari Mimoto22]

I've merely closed topics for nip slips. I've never, ever banned someone for a nip slip - those things happen.

I would like to recommend that there should be a small FAQ down at the bottom of the rules thread, in case users has more questions that may not be originally stated in the rules. I've seen it done over in other forums that I was in, so perhaps this would also cause less of a commotion?

[Fiel]

If a user has a question about the R&R, he or she can simply post in the R&R thread. The R&R typically gets updated once every few months because some young whippersnappers do something that the rules don't cover anyhow.

[Sarah]

You claimed to have enabled the private messaging system for banned users, but it doesn't work. If you click private messages it just reloads the infraction page.

As far as everything else goes, I don't really care. I think you're sending the wrong message by saying "go ahead and create another account, you can get away with anything if you're a valued member." I understand this for a permanent ban (re: greg coming back as grog) but if it's a 10 day ban it should be unacceptable. Serve your ban or appeal; if your appeal fails then serve your ban. The people who are accumulating points aren't bad for the site and therefore should never be put on the BoS list, they're just being themselves. But you're almost baiting them into getting BoS/IP'd with this system by encouraging them to immediately come back after a temp ban.

I just served 10 days, I know it's really difficult. 10 days is kind of excessive for someone who's just accumulated points, especially since points last THREE MONTHS. Which, in thinking about it, is also excessive. No one is going to be an angel for three months when they've got 5 - 6 points, and those of us with a penchant for speaking our minds are getting screwed for a quarter of the year, and that's unfair. It's a forum, for god's sake.

And on that note, the whole infraction system is kind of bull. I shouldn't have been banned for what I said. I flamed, I should have been infracted, but what I said was in no way deserving of a ban. I had two points left, I should have been able to slip by with a 1-point infraction for flaming. I could see a two pointer if I was continuously harassing Bomber, but it was an isolated incidence. Rules shouldn't be set in stone, that's a really gross and abusive way to run a community. Everything should be based on circumstances, rules should be a guideline; a reference, not a sentence. Everyone who's a little mean shouldn't immediately be condemned to a ban in their future with certainty. People who push it continuously should, but I was walking on damn eggshells for a month. I had two points left and nothing I said in that post was worth losing both of them.

This is a nice start on a system that needs to be completely rewritten but it's still not good enough, especially if you want a real growing community. People shouldn't live in fear of a heavy-handed moderator giving them ridiculous infractions because it's "the rules." Everything is circumstantial and should be treated as such. I did a lot of reflecting in the last 10 days and I've always known I'm not a great member or role-model by any means, and I'm not passing the blame for the things I've done wrong. But at the same time, the southperry administration is far from perfect so I don't know what you expect from us.

I've got a lot more to say but right now I'm just really flustered. I'm always going to be willing to work with you to make southperry a better place though, and you're always going to need my input. Not just mine, everyone's. I think that gets overlooked a lot.

[Kawasari Mimoto22]

I have a question in regards to the rules. If a member is continuously trolling another member, whether it be visitor-messaging, PMs, threads, individual posts (especially if not in Funhouse), is that bannable or infractionable? That's technically flame-baiting.

PS: I agree with the above posted, she's right. Some of your current members could have been previous administrators, or moderators from other forums (although maybe unrelated to MS), and you wouldn't even know it. -shrug- Some of them can give decent advice. I do notice one thing that I would like to speak up on. Don't play favoritism amongst certain members and letting them do whatever they want.

[Russt]

As far as everything else goes, I don't really care. I think you're sending the wrong message by saying "go ahead and create another account, you can get away with anything if you're a valued member." I understand this for a permanent ban (re: greg coming back as grog) but if it's a 10 day ban it should be unacceptable. Serve your ban or appeal; if your appeal fails then serve your ban. The people who are accumulating points aren't bad for the site and therefore should never be put on the BoS list, they're just being themselves. But you're almost baiting them into getting BoS/IP'd with this system by encouraging them to immediately come back after a temp ban.

I agree.

However, I don't think it would make much sense if 7 points = 10-day person ban while 14 points is "merely" an account ban. If this is to be changed, permanent bans should be accompanied with 10-day person bans as well, i.e. they should not be allowed to come back until after 10 days.

And on that note, the whole infraction system is kind of bull. I shouldn't have been banned for what I said. I flamed, I should have been infracted, but what I said was in no way deserving of a ban. I had two points left, I should have been able to slip by with a 1-point infraction for flaming. I could see a two pointer if I was continuously harassing Bomber, but it was an isolated incidence. Rules shouldn't be set in stone, that's a really gross and abusive way to run a community. Everything should be based on circumstances, rules should be a guideline; a reference, not a sentence. Everyone who's a little mean shouldn't immediately be condemned to a ban in their future with certainty. People who push it continuously should, but I was walking on damn eggshells for a month. I had two points left and nothing I said in that post was worth losing both of them.

Ironically, I think that if you never said "I'm going to get infracted for this" you probably wouldn't have gotten infracted for it. I remember some people were discussing this in IRC and they came to the same conclusion.