About high pardons @staff

[Grave]

I think people are forgetting that these users broke our rules, scammed other people and caused us problems.. why are they being defended so much. We owe them nothing - those who in our eyes deserve to be forgiven, are.

The only issue I see with the current system is that it's literally a popularity vote. If a part of the staff likes you, it goes through at least the voting stage. This lets the staff bring back their friends who broke the rules, and ignore people they hate. It's even more apparent with the veto system. It just seems like it's there for this sole purpose with how it's designed.

The staff's argument is that if there's no post, you can think of it as a no. Then why not stop being a lazy fuck and actually post no with a reason?

 

[SuF]

The only issue I see with the current system is that it's literally a popularity vote. If a part of the staff likes you, it goes through at least the voting stage. This lets the staff bring back their friends who broke the rules, and ignore people they hate. It's even more apparent with the veto system. It just seems like it's there for this sole purpose with how it's designed.

The staff's argument is that if there's no post, you can think of it as a no. Then why not stop being a lazy fuck and actually post no with a reason?

That is exactly what it is for the most part as well as a way to not enforce asinine rules.

 

I can't answer that because I usually post no, but I don't see a need for a requirement as such.

 

[roundkickkid]

I see a lot of people posting about this a good percentage of the time it is a popularity parade, the staff like them or they are higher up they would get tonnes of attention.

 

[Delta Squad]

The only issue I see with the current system is that it's literally a popularity vote. If a part of the staff likes you, it goes through at least the voting stage. This lets the staff bring back their friends who broke the rules, and ignore people they hate. It's even more apparent with the veto system. It just seems like it's there for this sole purpose with how it's designed.

The staff's argument is that if there's no post, you can think of it as a no. Then why not stop being a lazy fuck and actually post no with a reason?

^

honestly only reason i forsee myself still being here is because of the popularity thing, would i be pardoned again if i was to pardon today, and not a year ago?




Also to sum up the op, its a privilage not a right to pardon, although i think the pardon system should be removed.

 

[R2Pleasent]

If you remove the pardon system, you could also try removing perm bans for most offences. Perm bans would switch to 1 year bans for scamming. Direct blackhat stuff like hacking, mass-recovering accounts for profit, anything super-serious is a perm-ban. This should be fairly obvious and easy to distinguish. Something like scamming 20M on Runescape, recovering a personal Runescape account, and self-vouching become a 1-year ban.

If a user wishes to return after the 1-year ban, they must first repay all owed money to Sythe himself (with interest). A very select few Admins may use these holding funds to repay any direct victims from the scams, if they come forward with sufficient evidence. Money left-over will be simply kept by Sythe.

After serving the 1-year ban, the user will always have a rank / status which shows they were banned previously for scamming. This will make anyone who trades the user fully aware that they were previously banned for scamming. This also eliminates the need for a pardon system, and provides some revenue to the site through uncollected scam money. This should sustain any extra effort required in the system.

Many users on this site are between the ages of 14-17. They are still developing their moral compass. We should allow people a chance to redeem themselves.

In terms of ban evasion, the 1-year ban is applied on the most recent ban received by the user. Obviously, they will be required to repay ALL scams done by them on all accounts before returning. If a user who has had a 1-year ban re-offends after serving out a 1-year sentence, they will be given a 2-year ban.

 

[freakyhair]

If you remove the pardon system, you could also try removing perm bans for most offences. Perm bans would switch to 1 year bans for scamming. Direct blackhat stuff like hacking, mass-recovering accounts for profit, anything super-serious is a perm-ban. This should be fairly obvious and easy to distinguish. Something like scamming 20M on Runescape, recovering a personal Runescape account, and self-vouching become a 1-year ban.

If a user wishes to return after the 1-year ban, they must first repay all owed money to Sythe himself (with interest). A very select few Admins may use these holding funds to repay any direct victims from the scams, if they come forward with sufficient evidence. Money left-over will be simply kept by Sythe.

After serving the 1-year ban, the user will always have a rank / status which shows they were banned previously for scamming. This will make anyone who trades the user fully aware that they were previously banned for scamming. This also eliminates the need for a pardon system, and provides some revenue to the site through uncollected scam money. This should sustain any extra effort required in the system.

Many users on this site are between the ages of 14-17. They are still developing their moral compass. We should allow people a chance to redeem themselves.

In terms of ban evasion, the 1-year ban is applied on the most recent ban received by the user. Obviously, they will be required to repay ALL scams done by them on all accounts before returning. If a user who has had a 1-year ban re-offends after serving out a 1-year sentence, they will be given a 2-year ban.

This is an awesome idea, but the thing is it doesn't NEED to be changed. We have a perfectly good system going on at the moment. Yes it may need tweaking but I think it's a little too late for an entirely new system.

 

[SuF]

If you remove the pardon system, you could also try removing perm bans for most offences. Perm bans would switch to 1 year bans for scamming. Direct blackhat stuff like hacking, mass-recovering accounts for profit, anything super-serious is a perm-ban. This should be fairly obvious and easy to distinguish. Something like scamming 20M on Runescape, recovering a personal Runescape account, and self-vouching become a 1-year ban.

If a user wishes to return after the 1-year ban, they must first repay all owed money to Sythe himself (with interest). A very select few Admins may use these holding funds to repay any direct victims from the scams, if they come forward with sufficient evidence. Money left-over will be simply kept by Sythe.

After serving the 1-year ban, the user will always have a rank / status which shows they were banned previously for scamming. This will make anyone who trades the user fully aware that they were previously banned for scamming. This also eliminates the need for a pardon system, and provides some revenue to the site through uncollected scam money. This should sustain any extra effort required in the system.

Many users on this site are between the ages of 14-17. They are still developing their moral compass. We should allow people a chance to redeem themselves.

In terms of ban evasion, the 1-year ban is applied on the most recent ban received by the user. Obviously, they will be required to repay ALL scams done by them on all accounts before returning. If a user who has had a 1-year ban re-offends after serving out a 1-year sentence, they will be given a 2-year ban.

Too lazy to read but the pardon system came about partly because I was trying to get rid of perm bans for scammers but it will never be done.

 

[R2Pleasent]

Too lazy to read but the pardon system came about partly because I was trying to get rid of perm bans for scammers but it will never be done.

Come on give it a read, let's see what you think

 

[SuF]

Come on give it a read, let's see what you think

I skimmed. Same thing that me / Deacon / Blupig have thought of before, essentially. It's just not ever going to happen, unfortunately.

 

[R2Pleasent]

It's too bad because we force a lot of people into a situation where they ban evade. If there was some light at the end of the tunnel, some users may actually be able to redeem themselves and turn a negative into a positive. Some kids on this forum are literally 13 years old.

If we ban them and tell them never to come back, we are telling them that they are the bad guys. They accept this role and the only way to come back to the site is as a ban evader. As a ban evader and a criminal, a user is much more likely to commit more offences against the community.

 

[SuF]

It's too bad because we force a lot of people into a situation where they ban evade. If there was some light at the end of the tunnel, some users may actually be able to redeem themselves and turn a negative into a positive. Some kids on this forum are literally 13 years old.

If we ban them and tell them never to come back, we are telling them that they are the bad guys. They accept this role and the only way to come back to the site is as a ban evader. As a ban evader and a criminal, a user is much more likely to commit more offences against the community.

I'm very aware of that but the amount of people that are striving for "justice" is too damn high.

 

[S]

If you remove the pardon system, you could also try removing perm bans for most offences. Perm bans would switch to 1 year bans for scamming. Direct blackhat stuff like hacking, mass-recovering accounts for profit, anything super-serious is a perm-ban. This should be fairly obvious and easy to distinguish. Something like scamming 20M on Runescape, recovering a personal Runescape account, and self-vouching become a 1-year ban.

If a user wishes to return after the 1-year ban, they must first repay all owed money to Sythe himself (with interest). A very select few Admins may use these holding funds to repay any direct victims from the scams, if they come forward with sufficient evidence. Money left-over will be simply kept by Sythe.

After serving the 1-year ban, the user will always have a rank / status which shows they were banned previously for scamming. This will make anyone who trades the user fully aware that they were previously banned for scamming. This also eliminates the need for a pardon system, and provides some revenue to the site through uncollected scam money. This should sustain any extra effort required in the system.

Many users on this site are between the ages of 14-17. They are still developing their moral compass. We should allow people a chance to redeem themselves.

In terms of ban evasion, the 1-year ban is applied on the most recent ban received by the user. Obviously, they will be required to repay ALL scams done by them on all accounts before returning. If a user who has had a 1-year ban re-offends after serving out a 1-year sentence, they will be given a 2-year ban.

This is a great idea. If the pardon system were to be removed, I'd hope this would follow.

 

[roundkickkid]

Anymore input on this?

 

[CoinKing]

I believe more time must be given to the pardon requests.
Some of the mods may be at vacation or just have irl probles/work and not be able to visit the forum in that time range.

 

[AdamsGoldShop]

If you remove the pardon system, you could also try removing perm bans for most offences. Perm bans would switch to 1 year bans for scamming. Direct blackhat stuff like hacking, mass-recovering accounts for profit, anything super-serious is a perm-ban. This should be fairly obvious and easy to distinguish. Something like scamming 20M on Runescape, recovering a personal Runescape account, and self-vouching become a 1-year ban.

If a user wishes to return after the 1-year ban, they must first repay all owed money to Sythe himself (with interest). A very select few Admins may use these holding funds to repay any direct victims from the scams, if they come forward with sufficient evidence. Money left-over will be simply kept by Sythe.

After serving the 1-year ban, the user will always have a rank / status which shows they were banned previously for scamming. This will make anyone who trades the user fully aware that they were previously banned for scamming. This also eliminates the need for a pardon system, and provides some revenue to the site through uncollected scam money. This should sustain any extra effort required in the system.

Many users on this site are between the ages of 14-17. They are still developing their moral compass. We should allow people a chance to redeem themselves.

In terms of ban evasion, the 1-year ban is applied on the most recent ban received by the user. Obviously, they will be required to repay ALL scams done by them on all accounts before returning. If a user who has had a 1-year ban re-offends after serving out a 1-year sentence, they will be given a 2-year ban.

this would be a good idea. Also i would remove the rule about hackforums stuff, because they are so easy to fake...
any1 could do this:
>makes an account called r2pleasent
>posts about blackhat activity, and includes your skype name
>reports r2pleasent on sythe for blackhat

 

this would be a good idea. Also i would remove the rule about hackforums stuff, because they are so easy to fake...
any1 could do this:
>makes an account called r2pleasent
>posts about blackhat activity, and includes your skype name
>reports r2pleasent on sythe for blackhat

in that case the user would dispute and we'd look in to it

personally i dont want any scammers i dont believe have changed come back. not just because they may scam, but because they dont deserve to be able to use the forums any more

 

[AdamsGoldShop]

in that case the user would dispute and we'd look in to it

personally i dont want any scammers i dont believe have changed come back. not just because they may scam, but because they dont deserve to be able to use the forums any more

how can some1 proove that its not him on hackforums? if name+skype matches

 

[ShadowRez]

I think the pardon system is good, i do not want scammer on this site and i think our admins do a wonderful job of figuring out if they should be welcome back or not