Bannings

Can staff simply make it so someone can't be instantly denied of their dispute and or pardon? It's rather bad considering people aren't allowed to dispute again, and pardon's can only be used every 6 months.. Seems biasness, or laziness can highly affect the state of a dispute. And if a higher up doesn't agree with it (while nearly everyone else does) it just gets denied.
Note: I am not involving this with any particular case.

Suggestion updated:
Suggesting that upon a pardon/dispute having momentum for unban (2 or so moderators supporting the unban) that it wouldn't be able to be immediately denied by one upper staff.

Thoughts? Or am I over-reacting?

 

Support, a very good idea, you are not over reacting.

 

Definitely support.

One example I'd like to point out is:
http://sythe.org/showthread.php?p=8314303#post8314303

While I have absolutely nothing against Finn (he's one of the best mods) that was absolutely ridiculous. I also found similar disputes and pardons being automatically rejected and sometimes not even replied to but they're locked and/or archived. Even if there's a massive history behind it and irrefutable proof at least more than one opinoin should be passed; obviously the exception to this is Sythe's (the owner) decisions.

 

Full support. Those "Denied." messages are uncalled for in many cirucmstances. Especially when the rest of the mods would me onboard with an unban. (ie: http://www.sythe.org/showthread.php?t=1056000 )

 

Indeed this is a very good idea.
Support.

 

Support.

 

Full support. It's really unjust that they simply get denied without time.

Those two cases that were posted in this thread are really unjust. It was not a professional move tbh.

 

I don't support, actually, for a couple reasons:

1. There are advantages to keeping the site's means of detection (for example, detection of ban evasion) a secret. If mods explained in every ban, "we know you're so-and-so, because..." it not only lets the banned user know where they went wrong (thus improving any future attempts at evasion), but it also informs other evaders what to avoid.

2. It's hard to see from the outside, but a lot of the time, disputes aren't actually worth the effort to the explain - ie, when the mod is 100% sure, without a doubt, that the user already knows exactly what they did wrong, that they are indeed guilty of what they are accused of, and their appeal is nothing more than a shot in the dark. In such cases, the only response the user is likely to get is "Denied," or nothing. (As example, there was one kid who I banned for evasion about 8 times in a month, because he kept using the same email, and each time he would say "how did i get banned for evasion, I don't even know who that is." My response, each time, was simply "Denied.")

If there's really something wrong, members can appeal to staff members via MSN. If they can convince a staff member that their dispute was unfairly handled, the mod can post in the staff lounge to demand further explanation, where the issue can then be voted on.

 

I support Fully.

 

Thread came out wrong, meant so a particular staff member wouldn't be allowed to simply post "Denied" on a thread if it already had support from 2 or so other mods. (Providing it's within a reasonable time frame)

Completely understandable, a majority of the disputes I see are complete BS. Understand posting "Denied" when it's blatantly obvious, but when there are other staff members believing that the user should be unbanned; it should at least be put to a vote. IMO this would mainly be for pardons, not really disputes.

Just seems all of that can be avoided if it was looked deeper into. Again, this isn't for every dispute, just the ones that staff member(s) have created some type of momentum for.

 

Huge support from me. Seeing this: http://sythe.org/showthread.php?t=1065803


Annoyed me.

 

I am a ban evader, I have no intentions of hiding it (was actually waiting for the moment). The thing is that there is a friend of mine which got banned and his scent was all over me so I got banned, that's cool I knew I wasn't him and was not evading so I made a post in the dispute
http://www.sythe.org/showthread.php?t=1034022
That was about it.
I opened another dispute and it got deleted.
I opened another asking not to delete explaining that i felt that I haven't had a fair chance at being unbanned and it got deleted.
Now I do understand that to save time you might have to ignore what you believe is not a false positive but ignoring everything the same way you ignored that obvious vader is going to get quite a few wrong bans in which I am included.
Don't blame me on anything I am just doing what I could, I did 3 or 4 disputes, added 2 mods involved no response added another 2 mods to ask for help with this no response.
It is ok if you ban me, all I want is to be given a fair ban dispute with a bit of your opinion and a bit of his opinion, i believe it would be found evident that I am not that person.
I am sorry tmoe if this isn't what you were talking about but this was and is very frustrating to me too.

 

the one with video is just dumb i find it funny how all the mods get hacked 24/7 and its just dont trade with them...but video a huge gold seller is not aloud back its dumb and pointless and almost proves finn has a alternative motive that could be shot down by other mods

support

i also think that all staff should have a equal decision in who come back considering they are the ones who have to ban keep threads up to date and know there part of sythe they are going to know just as much info

 

I do not support, sorry.
I don't like the 'sound' of it.

But, if we have ONE pardon per 6months, then yea, let it be a vote to unban/ban.
If it continues to be pardon after pardon every damn day for the same person. Fuck it. Keep them banned for breaking rules again (1 per 6month)