Pardon system updates

[Superfluous]

We are making the following changes to the pardon system, effectively immediately:

1. Removal of the "7 day rule" in the first round of voting and replacement with the "5 vote rule" (see below).
2. Pardons that reach the second round of voting will have their decisions posted publicly.

As a result of these changes, the pardon system now works as follows:

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.

As updating the pardon system has been a contentious topic for many months, we encourage you to post feedback and questions regarding these changes here.

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.

 

[Syed]

Cool, thanks for the update.

 

Great change

 

[Add My Msn]

I don't agree with the 5 supports / denies whichever comes first.

 

Perfect, makes up for some inactive mods because some times not all mods vote and people simply don't have enough time for 5 supports. Great job!

 

The part in USL needs to have the same kind of system.

Otherwise nice job

 

Nice changes! Pardon system needed some rework

 

Good job. It's about time a "no support" had value.

The part in USL needs to have the same kind of system.

Otherwise nice job

Not enough upper staff to make it effective.

 

[Pain]

Good job. It's about time a "no support" had value.



Not enough upper staff to make it effective.

Agreed, upper staff wouldn't ever be able to carry a vote on any pardons which would cause a huge backlog.


I'm still waiting for the 6 month timer to drop lower though, that is still an extremely long period of time.

 

6 months won't be getting reduced. Character reform doesn't happen overnight and often hasn't even occurred (in our eyes) during that time period.

 

[Xier0]

Agreed, upper staff wouldn't ever be able to carry a vote on any pardons which would cause a huge backlog.


I'm still waiting for the 6 month timer to drop lower though, that is still an extremely long period of time.

Fuck that. If you get banned, fail an appeal, then fail a pardon, you probably did some vile shit. 6 months is just fine, especially with the new reqs.

 

[Pain]

6 months won't be getting reduced. Character reform doesn't happen overnight and often hasn't even occurred (in our eyes) during that time period.

Would staff consider moving it to a case by case basis though?


I feel the guy who scammed $5k deserves the 6 month wait.

However if someone is banned for an offence that's 5 years old on a very tiny game... perhaps sythe staff can close pardons and decide how long u need to wait to re-pardon?


Not everyone neccsarily needs 6 months for a character reform, sometimes people end up waiting a long time for a very old offence ;p.

 

If their offence is 5 years old and their pardon is denied there's likely more to it. It's firm and won't be changed.

 

[arneliamsberg]

Great change keep it up

 

[Brendan]

Great updates, props to Superfluous who's worked very hard on this.

The main thing to remember is that the pardon system is a privilege and not a right.

 

I don't support the "first to 5 supports/no supports" rule since more evidence might come to light and may have changed the outcome of the pardon/changed a staff member's thoughts on the pardon. Other than that, seems pretty solid and making things more public is good.

 

I think it's a good change that pardon results are shown publicly, hope that the other change works out well aswell.

 

[Superfluous]

The part in USL needs to have the same kind of system.
Otherwise nice job

More upper staff vote on pardons than lower staff do. You'd think it's less active, but it's actually surprisingly active. For what it's worth, I had originally suggested a "first to 3" system for the second round of voting, but that was unpopular.

Agreed, upper staff wouldn't ever be able to carry a vote on any pardons which would cause a huge backlog.
I'm still waiting for the 6 month timer to drop lower though, that is still an extremely long period of time.

Are you planning on needing to pardon again or something? Anyway, JG's right, not gonna happen.

Would staff consider moving it to a case by case basis though?

Absolutely not. Rules only work if they apply to people equitably. You seem to think staff play the favorites game all the time, and this would literally be hand-selecting pardons to expedite, so I'm not sure why you're in favor of this.

I don't support the "first to 5 supports/no supports" rule since more evidence might come to light and may have changed the outcome of the pardon/changed a staff member's thoughts on the pardon. Other than that, seems pretty solid and making things more public is good.

Staff have always been able to change their votes after making them. If a pardon gets five quick "support" votes and then new evidence comes to light in, or even before, the second round of voting begins, it will definitely be taken into account. Also, to all the people who don't like the "first to 5" rule, keep in mind that the vast majority of pardons are lopsided in the sense that most staff vote in one direction. The aim of this rule is to prevent staff from denying pardons due to their own inactivity, not so much to change the way we vote on pardons. And, of course, if this system isn't working, we can change it in the future.

Great updates, props to Superfluous who's worked very hard on this.
The main thing to remember is that the pardon system is a privilege and not a right.

Blupig also deserves credit; he pushed this pretty hard for the past few weeks.

 

Looks good. I always thought it was weird how people who had pardons that made it to the second round were just told "if you're unbanned at the end of the 7 days, your pardon was successful, if not, it wasn't." A little more clarity by having the results posted publicly is a nice change.

 

[T V]

Interesting