Pardon system updates feedback

[Superfluous]

Please post feedback and questions regarding the updates to the pardon system here.

 

[Pain]

Delete, misread the topic.

 

[Superfluous]

Your post isn't on topic, but I'll respond throughout in a spoiler.

Spoiler: Long post

So, I've been pushing,arguing and annoying the hell out of staff and suggested huge lengthy systems which have some flaws and some perks.

But for now I'm going to post this general feedback:
-Pardoning is to difficult, no matter what anyone says, its HARD.

I used every ounce of influence, money and ability I had to get a pardon through, I went to lengths as far as hiring staff, ex-staff, buying their sigs, Usertitles, everything, I spent a small fortune trying to assure that my pardon would at least have a chance.
Did you just admit to trying to buy staff votes...?
I truly believe that if you aren't a somebody or don't have connections in some form, your pardon has close to 0 chance at passing.
This is not true, we pardon plenty of people you've never even heard of (this will become apparent as the new sticky recording second round voting decisions is populated)
Many of the staff I talked to I'm still friends with today, and I can tell you who's harsh on rule breakers, whos not as harsh, who you should go to and ask to get ur first support, etc.

It's interesting watching the patterns of staff's voting, believe me if you want to or not, but I read EVERY SINGLE DISPUTE AND PARDON,EVERY SINGLE ONE.

There are patterns, which staff seem to be in favor of letting certain rule breakers back in(like some staff support scamming pardons more than blackhat, etc etc).
As there will be in any sample of people...
Then theres the whole issue of the first vote.

I believe the first vote on a pardon is the most decisive factor in a pardon, many staff are uncomfortable or unwilling to vote if they believe their opinon might be super unpopular.

There is a very "band wagon" approach to pardons, both from staff and players, I think at least some staff will agree with me here, most of the time if the first vote on a pardon is negative, typically some staff bandwagon on that reason or that vote.
The bandwagon effect is present in any group of people. This is one of the reasons why we have two rounds of voting.
I think its extremely unfair to the person pardoning to post offences they potentially might of forgotten or left out, sometimes voting on pardons might not happen for a week or longer and by then u've got 15 comments without a single vote while trying to figure out a situation.
We're not responsible for documenting people's offenses. We can help, and we do help a lot, but when people leave glaring omissions, we deny those pardons.
I see no reason for staff- Whether hidden or unhidden, to be posting about all these things on a pardon, staff are suppose to make a general vote based on what THEY KNOW, its so unfair to people that staff go to vote on their pardon and theres already 10 or 15 comments of people arguing details, ironing out information, etc.
The point being able to post on these threads at all is to gather and synthesize information. If we wanted uneducated voting, we would make all pardon threads polls.
In my opinon a pardon should NOT be allowed to be voted on unless its a fresh or freshly remade thread, every staff looks at huge blocks of text and "you forgot to mention these: offences" and immediately puts them in a negative mind set.

Staff should go based off their merits, if somebody forgets a offence, how hard can it be to shoot them a message on skype asking them about it and having them add it in?
We do this on their threads all the time.
Instead no, its a "you forgot these... auto denied" or "you forgot these...no support".
Only when serious offenses (read: scamming hundreds of dollars, repeated ban evasion, etc.) are omitted is this the case
It's so unfair lmao, some people DO forget certain accounts and offences, ESPECIALLY if their really old, its bullshit for staff to be put in a negative mind set if they legitimately forgot something.


The rest of this is irrelevant. Over 20 staff members voted, and the system we chose was the most popular vote. We're not changing it because you like your idea better.
Here's an old system I proposed a while back, I cba rewriting it so heres atleast a rough layout:

First stage: You post your pardon. You have 7 days to collect 5 supports. You can contact staff to ask them to look at it. Not gaining 5 supports will lead to a denied pardon.
Second stage: Pardons passing stage one will be copied to the upper-staff's lounge (consisting of Global Moderators and Administrators). It must gain a 60% majority vote in its favour to pass. This lasts for 1 week.
The decision: You are either unbanned or remain banned after one week. You can contact a Global Moderator or Administrator to double check if you are unsure after one week.


Use the template (or similar) provided above.
•Be able to demonstrate reform of character and legitimate regret for your offence(s).
•Be able to demonstrate good will toward the site without hostility, and be willing to accept the verdict of this pardon process without complaint.
•Repay all victims and provide evidence of this. If you cannot contact them, provide evidence of trying to without success (there must be proof of at least ONE MONTH time being passed for attempting to contact the victim for each pardon separately.)

•Pardons may instantly be denied for 6 months in situations where pertinent information is purposefully left



system 1 part 2:


First Stage; You pardon must collect a rating of +5 at the END of a 7 day period to pass onto the next stage in the USL
The rating system works as follows:
-Sectionals can give a +1 or -1
-Globals can give a +2 or -2
-Administrators can give a +3 or -3, or a veto, 2 vetos leads to instant denial


The pardon must recieve a MINIMUM of 5 total staff votes to be considerd a offical pardon, if 5 votes are not cast after 7 days, your pardon will not be considerd and does not count towards the waiting period.


If a pardon fails to recieve a +5 vote at the end of 7 days, your pardon will be denied and you must wait a 3 month period before pardoning again.

Note: it is NOT possible to go negative on a pardon, if you post a pardon and recieve a no support off the bat, then a support, u will still be at +1,+2 or +3 depending who voted, this will essentially remove the "bandwagon" or "follow the leader" method of voting by staff

Any no supports after the first vote are all considerd a -1,-2 or -3 depending who voted.


Second Stage; Your pardon is moved to the USL for voting

This stage your pardon must recieve a +5 in the USL after 7 days to pass voting and for you to be unbanned offically.

As stated before,the point breakdown is this:

Globals +2 or -2

Administrators +3 or -3

Note: it is NOT possible to go negative on a pardon, if you post a pardon and recieve a no support off the bat, then a support, u will still be at +1,+2 or +3 depending who voted, this will essentially remove the "bandwagon" or "follow the leader" method of voting by staff

Any no supports after the first vote are all considerd a -2,-2 or -3 depending who voted.


After 7 days if you recieve a +5 vote you will be unbanned.
If you do not, you will remain banned and must wait 3 months until your next pardon.

Example:

Video, Shin, superman and entrr all vote yes on pardon x, this gives pardon x a +8
Firez votes no on pardon x, this gives pardon x a +5.
N4n0 and matthew also vote no on pardon x, but instead of pardon x going to a -1, pardon x CANNOT drop below 0.
Meaning if the next vote is a support by ardy, pardon x is now +2 instead of +1.


This basically allows for users to have a better chance at pardoning,instead of a no support killing your chances potentially in the USL.



Pardons may be denied if any reasonable information is left out, if relatively related offences are mentioned, said pardons will be allowed to continue voting.
Ban evading will not be considerd in pardons.
All scams must be repaid before attempting to pardon and u must show proof of trying to contact the victim within the past 2 weeks, HOWEVER, if the victim has not been active in over 3 months voting may begin.
-Any offence over 3 years old will not be considerd in a pardon




If pardons dont recieve 5 total votes the pardon will be denied, the user pardoning will be allowed to post a new pardon 2 weeks after the last denial in an attempt to gather the 5 total votes minimum.


If the user attempts a 2nd pardon and does not recieve 5 total votes, the user must wait 6 months until repardoning from the 2nd pardon date.

 

[Pain]

As of today's updates, the following system explains how pardon voting works:
1.User posts a pardon.
2.Staff members clarify any outstanding questions regarding the pardon.
3.The first round of voting occurs.◦All staff members may vote, and all votes must be posted publicly.
◦The pardon remains open until it collects 5 "support" votes or 5 "no support" votes, whichever occurs first.
◦Pardons that collect 5 "support" votes first move on to the second round of voting.
◦Pardons that collect 5 "no support" votes first are denied for six months.

4.The second round of voting occurs.◦Only global moderators and administrators may vote on pardons in this round.
◦The pardon remains open for 7 days, and pardons are accepted if they collect 60% or more of the upper staff vote.
◦Pardons that do not collect 60% or more of the vote are denied for six months.
◦Upper staff pardon decisions are to be posted publicly.


Note that pardons denied in the first round of voting in last 6 months (from September 19, 2015 onwards) that did not collect 5 "no support" votes may be reposted, effective immediately.
__________________

I like the requirement to get 5 no supports OR 5 supports instead of denying it based on lack of support.

Quick question: By saying all votes will be required to be posted publicly, are u still allowing staff to keep posts hidden on pardons that contain information or will these now be made public to?

 

[Superfluous]

I like the requirement to get 5 no supports OR 5 supports instead of denying it based on lack of support.

Quick question: By saying all votes will be required to be posted publicly, are u still allowing staff to keep posts hidden on pardons that contain information or will these now be made public to?

Only votes are required to be public. For what it's worth, ~99% of votes were public before this update.

 

[Superfluous]

personally really happy with how well this has been working so far. curious to hear if others dis/agree

 

I have not really seen much of these changes. It might be just me, but I haven't seen a single USL vote on a pardon that got through the first stage of voting. Look at Wolfrunescape's pardon, it's over 7 days and there is no verdict from USL yet.

 

[Superfluous]

I have not really seen much of these changes. It might be just me, but I haven't seen a single USL vote on a pardon that got through the first stage of voting. Look at Wolfrunescape's pardon, it's over 7 days and there is no verdict from USL yet.

http://www.sythe.org/request-pardon/1945389-pardon-decisions-thread.html

that's mostly on us to update the thread as we go. ill do that now. also note that something's holding up wolf's pardon that we need an admin to look into so that's a special case

 

Ah didn't know that existed. Thanks! Would be cool if you didn't only include the outcome but also WHY.

 

I agree to the adding of "why". Would make the decisions made by the upper staff appear transparent and hopefully publicizing it would help eliminate bias. It's ultimately up to you guys to deem whether or not that's a smart idea though.

 

I agree to the adding of "why". Would make the decisions made by the upper staff appear transparent and hopefully publicizing it would help eliminate bias. It's ultimately up to you guys to deem whether or not that's a smart idea though.

I'm a fan of this, I don't like seeing "denied" without a reason as to why. Sometimes it's obvious, but often times it isn't. Would this be a possibility?

 

Sometimes, it's best to leave out our reasoning in pardons. It just makes it that much easier to call people on their BS, and how and why we know they're lying. Aside from that, they can contact a global on skype. Posting results is ideal, but reasoning doesn't always need to be publically available to everyone.

 

[FireZ]

I'm a fan of this, I don't like seeing "denied" without a reason as to why. Sometimes it's obvious, but often times it isn't. Would this be a possibility?

Not going to happen

 

[XenonLul]

As a member who has had first hand experience with the pardon process, I find the current system to be sufficient. People arguing that the six month waiting period following an unsuccessful pardon is wrong need to remember that the pardon platform is not designed to be an easy out for users with questionable history. Generally speaking, people who are pardoning bans have exhibited poor judgement whether it be on Sythe or on a different forum. No one is entitled to a pardon or an unban and the pardon platform is really a privilege that any banned members should be grateful for. With that being said, giving a reason for supporting or denying a pardon is simply unnecessary.

 

[Superfluous]

I agree. So far I think it has had a positive effect on the system. One thing I would recommend is making the following more apparent-

i mean, it's on the announcement... that's pretty visible, no?

I agree to the adding of "why". Would make the decisions made by the upper staff appear transparent and hopefully publicizing it would help eliminate bias. It's ultimately up to you guys to deem whether or not that's a smart idea though.

the reason is that the pardon didn't get enough votes supporting it...

 

I used to be a supporter of staff being required to give a reason as to why they don't support a pardon, but the act is pretty disingenuous, especially when you give a standard reason (ex: Don't trust you), and it usually turns into a back and forth argument over opinions, which in turn discourages participation. It shouldn't be mandatory, it should be encouraged.

From here on out, we shouldn't make pardons more easier to pass. Everything is fine as is.

 

[KuteServices]

I believe the new pardon system is much more fair, good job. The time limit didn't make much sense to me since staff could be busy and not vote within 5 days..

Not sure if this fits in the thread but this thread needs to be updated:
http://www.sythe.org/request-pardon...es-avoid-thread-being-locked-auto-denied.html, it outlines the old pardon rules not the new ones.