Amend the one-month dispute time.

I think the current time rule has a larger negative impact on the forum than a positive one. Now, I would agree to this time frame if the user did not have the proof himself, as it could be quite strenuous for the staff member to go around through the archives finding proof. But what justification is there in the case where the member has complete and adequate proof? All it's doing is preventing legitimate users from coming back to the site. Additionally, a lot of people leave for months after being banned unfairly, thus failing to meet the one-month rule, but should that really render their dispute invalid?

Amendment I suggest: The one-month rule should be in effect if the user has not presented the proof for the unban. If the user does have legitimate, straightforward proof, he should be able to dispute his ban at any time.

I'd just like to add something so that the staff knows:

Even if my suggestion is denied, please keep in mind that most of the guys disputing their bans from months ago were banned before the rule was put into effect, and so it shouldn't apply to them.

Thanks.

 

I agree 100%. The current month rule is nothing but detrimental to Sythe. How can a month rule help? If someone has proof, and they don't submit it within a month for reasons in the above post, why should they be banned? If I was banned for some reason I didn't commit, I would feel betrayed by the Sythe staff and I would be hesitant to request to return so instantaneously.

 

Thanks for the feedback. Let's hope other members agree

 

The rule will not change.

We may make exceptions if people have a good reason, but one month is more than enough time to write up your argument.