Revise pardon rules

[MohtasaUnique]

Include a clause that disallows pardoning more than once. Pardons should be handed out sparingly anyway, staff shouldn't even CONSIDER giving a second pardon to a user. This suggestion is obviously a result of deathsnova's pardon. Yes, I openly hated on the user, but I'm not making this suggestion just to keep him out of sythe. It's something I whole-heartedly believe should be the standard of the pardon system. It's something I just thought about because I've never seen someone try to pardon AGAIN until now, so now that it's happening, I suggest that we draw this line here and now.


To clarify, this suggestion is to disallow users who've ALREADY BEEN GRANTED A PARDON from getting another pardon

 

I'm a little stuck on this - on one hand I agree with you in saying that a pardon should be a one time deal. One last chance per say.

On the other hand though even though somebody had been banned before they should still be given at least the opportunity to have a say. The way I understand pardons is that they are given to users who have been forgiven for the actions that resulted in their bans. So why should those people be treated any differently than those who have clean records? Isn't a pardon a way of wiping someone's slate clean considering there are no more conditional pardons?

 

[MohtasaUnique]

I'm a little stuck on this - on one hand I agree with you in saying that a pardon should be a one time deal. One last chance per say.

On the other hand though even though somebody had been banned before they should still be given at least the opportunity to have a say. The way I understand pardons is that they are given to users who have been forgiven for the actions that resulted in their bans. So why should those people be treated any differently than those who have clean records? Isn't a pardon a way of wiping someone's slate clean considering there are no more conditional pardons?

Their last opportunity to have a say should be a dispute on their ban. If they are truly deserving of a pardon, then they wouldn't have found themselves in the need to pardon TWICE. Obviously they weren't contrite enough to stay unbanned.

As for pardons wiping someone's slate clean, look at bankruptcies. They're supposed to wipe your financial slate clean, yet you still aren't allowed to go bankrupt twice within 8 years because it just makes sense. It prevents people from abusing the system, and if they really can't keep their finances in order AFTER being given a clean slate, maybe they deserve 8 years of crippling debt.

 

[LoLSmurfin]

I couldn't agree more. Two pardons? Seriously?

"I know I said I changed before, but I did, then I had a bit of a relapse, but now I'm better" sounds like rehab.

...and this isn't rehab. It's a real online market where innocent people get scammed or DDoS'ed or hacked or whatever else have you. Letting someone back onto the site after two permanent bans is ridiculous. The likelihood of them scamming someone else is definitely higher than it is for an average Sythe user, and it's not fair to the community to reinstate banned users a second time.

 

[DipperBaby]

I couldn't agree more. Two pardons? Seriously?

"I know I said I changed before, but I did, then I had a bit of a relapse, but now I'm better" sounds like rehab.

...and this isn't rehab. It's a real online market where innocent people get scammed or DDoS'ed or hacked or whatever else have you. Letting someone back onto the site after two permanent bans is ridiculous. The likelihood of them scamming someone else is definitely higher than it is for an average Sythe user, and it's not fair to the community to reinstate banned users a second time.

Agreed. I fully support, I don't see how you should have a chance at pardoning a second time, if you got a perm ban after your first pardon.

 

[S]

Sorry bit confused Moh. Is the suggestion about disallowing an already pardoned user to pardon again (to things they didn't admit in their first one/if they did something since their initial pardon), or to make it so a user can only pardon once ever on Sythe.org (meaning after it's denied, they are toast (they can't come back in 6 months)).

 

[MohtasaUnique]

It's to disallow people who've already been granted a pardon from pardoning again, sorry for the confusion yo :F

 

[The Ract]

It's to disallow people who've already been granted a pardon from pardoning again, sorry for the confusion yo :F

Ohhh okay. The first time I read this I thought you meant once they get denied they're not allowed to re-pardon, and I wasn't gonna support that, as sometimes it just takes time.

However, a pardon is meant for a second and final chance. Should almost be like parole, where even the tiniest screw up and your done. I support this.

 

[Jake]

If a member gets banned a second time, he will have no incentive to ever pay back his victims. There also wouldn't be anything stopping him from vading on multiple accounts, as he'd know that his account was already perm banned.


In the end, it comes down to whether the staff trusts a member or not. If they see that the user in question has done something to receive a perm ban twice, chances are he won't be pardoned unless it's obvious that he isn't a threat to the community.

I don't really understand the point of this thread. Why set a rule in stone banning anyone from being given a chance to pardon a second time? It should be decided by the staff on a case by case basis, and if they see that the user has not changed then surely he'll remain banned.

 

[Time To Buy]

Marrow has had multiple pardons. Plznate has had multiple pardons. I have had two pardons. And I know others have been pardoned multiple times as well. There are legitimate reasons to have more than one pardon. Sure, what I pardoned for the first time was so minor that I wasn't even banned for it, so I guess you could say I only had one, but I still think the option to have multiple should stay. The reason being is because the nature of the offenses can be very different between two different pardons.

Suppose a user was banned in 2011 for scamming in 2009. He then pardons sometime later after all debts are paid. But then, in 2013, he is banned for creating drama in the community. Should he not be allowed at a later point once he's matured some? It's not like he repeated the same mistake he did the first time, it was for a completely different reason. Sure, if someone pardoned for scamming and then scams again, they shouldn't be allowed to pardon again. But I full heartedly believe that someone should have the right to pardon separate rule offenses (ie plagiarism and then fake vouching or something). Furthermore, why is it so hard for a pardon to be denied by lack of supports from staff if the rule breaker repeated the same crime a second time? I'm against the idea to have barring rules like no second pardons since there will always be exceptions where people feel a person deserves a second pardon, so to avoid dissolving rules to allow certain people to have extra pardon rights, simply have the rules of pardons be very open and then vote no to the cases that don't deserve support. It's that simple!

To summarize-
No support since people can have offenses that are very different.
Just vote no to second time pardoners who are undeserving.

 

[S]

After reading TTB's response, I'm inclined to not support.

 

[BGlave]

We cannot encourage members to break rules knowing they have a chance of passing a pardon at a later date. After your first pardon, you should have a certain mentality of not breaking the rules again. How hard can that be?

The pardon system is too loose and should have tighter restrictions asap.

 

[MohtasaUnique]

Marrow has had multiple pardons. Plznate has had multiple pardons. I have had two pardons. And I know others have been pardoned multiple times as well. There are legitimate reasons to have more than one pardon. Sure, what I pardoned for the first time was so minor that I wasn't even banned for it, so I guess you could say I only had one, but I still think the option to have multiple should stay. The reason being is because the nature of the offenses can be very different between two different pardons.

Suppose a user was banned in 2011 for scamming in 2009. He then pardons sometime later after all debts are paid. But then, in 2013, he is banned for creating drama in the community. Should he not be allowed at a later point once he's matured some? It's not like he repeated the same mistake he did the first time, it was for a completely different reason. Sure, if someone pardoned for scamming and then scams again, they shouldn't be allowed to pardon again. But I full heartedly believe that someone should have the right to pardon separate rule offenses (ie plagiarism and then fake vouching or something). Furthermore, why is it so hard for a pardon to be denied by lack of supports from staff if the rule breaker repeated the same crime a second time? I'm against the idea to have barring rules like no second pardons since there will always be exceptions where people feel a person deserves a second pardon, so to avoid dissolving rules to allow certain people to have extra pardon rights, simply have the rules of pardons be very open and then vote no to the cases that don't deserve support. It's that simple!

To summarize-
No support since people can have offenses that are very different.
Just vote no to second time pardoners who are undeserving.

I've no sympathy for someone who throws away their second chance, given to them by the pardon system. As that's what it seems your entire argument rests on, I'll leave it at that.

 

I have to say no support on this one. In the rare case that a second pardon is necessary (which I assume is very rare) I think it should be left entirely to staff discretion. If the majority of staff is in agreement on someones pardon it would be weird to be like "sorry, we can't pardon you because of the rule Moh suggested."

 

[MohtasaUnique]

I have to say no support on this one. In the rare case that a second pardon is necessary (which I assume is very rare) I think it should be left entirely to staff discretion. If the majority of staff is in agreement on someones pardon it would be weird to be like "sorry, we can't pardon you because of the rule Moh suggested."

I invite you to provide a scenario where it makes sense to give someone a THIRD chance

 

[Jake]

I invite you to provide a scenario where it makes sense to give someone a THIRD chance

Just take a look at IDB, he's been banned and pardoned 5 times.

 

[MohtasaUnique]

Just take a look at IDB, he's been banned and pardoned 5 times.

So... what are you getting at...? I wouldn't be posting this thread if that weren't already being allowed...............................

 

[Syed]

Shitty suggestion. Especially considering the current staff has been giving out Finn-era bans. People are getting banned for being dicks and nothing else and if they've been pardoned before they have no chance of coming back if this suggestion goes through.

You guys supporting have a lot more faith than I do in the staff system, but have no experience being on the other side. Once the staff dislikes you, you'll be getting banned for nothing over and over. And if you're saying, well they should dispute the ban, the staff will bring up a minor thing you did that's barely bannable and tell you to pardon, but owai- you can't.

I'd support if there was a stipulation that the offending party can't be pardoned again for a similar reason as his previous pardon. But even then it's a shitty suggestion, the staff already take it case-by-case, this will be doing absolutely nothing.

 

[MohtasaUnique]

Shitty suggestion. Especially considering the current staff has been giving out Finn-era bans. People are getting banned for being dicks and nothing else and if they've been pardoned before they have no chance of coming back if this suggestion goes through.

You guys supporting have a lot more faith than I do in the staff system, but have no experience being on the other side. Once the staff dislikes you, you'll be getting banned for nothing over and over. And if you're saying, well they should dispute the ban, the staff will bring up a minor thing you did that's barely bannable and tell you to pardon, but owai- you can't.

I'd support if there was a stipulation that the offending party can't be pardoned again for a similar reason as his previous pardon. But even then it's a shitty suggestion, the staff already take it case-by-case, this will be doing absolutely nothing.

So then people can dispute their "finn-era" bans. If staff deny the dispute, then they'll probably deny the pardon, and then it's a moot point.

And I don't know why you're saying I've never experienced the other side. I've been pardoned before. I've had literally zero trouble after my pardon because I'm not an idiot enough to throw away a second chance. It's really not that hard to stay unbanned on sythe.

 

[BGlave]

Shitty suggestion. Especially considering the current staff has been giving out Finn-era bans. People are getting banned for being dicks and nothing else and if they've been pardoned before they have no chance of coming back if this suggestion goes through.

You guys supporting have a lot more faith than I do in the staff system, but have no experience being on the other side. Once the staff dislikes you, you'll be getting banned for nothing over and over. And if you're saying, well they should dispute the ban, the staff will bring up a minor thing you did that's barely bannable and tell you to pardon, but owai- you can't.

I'd support if there was a stipulation that the offending party can't be pardoned again for a similar reason as his previous pardon. But even then it's a shitty suggestion, the staff already take it case-by-case, this will be doing absolutely nothing.

Can you name a banned member in particular to support your case? I can't name a current subjective staff member who would do that.