Stop! Squizzle Time!

[DeletedUser3967]

I made a mistake with my ban. I legitimate one.

Didn't even realise I was attacking 3 legs, thought it was the guy nobling vills off the acc I was sitting.

I was careless, I won't make excuses. I made a mistake and I will pay for it.

Seems 3 legs, went that step too far.

Rules are rules, no one is exempt.

 

[DeletedUser]

Quoting Spaceballs shouldn't be banable.

It was simply a ban because someoe claimed it was 'offensive'. The rules say nothing about a board of people ruling over such a claim, or weighing the veracity of said claim. They simply agree, automatically, and proceed with their lives.

So, in essence, I can look across the map and claim a lot of things are "offensive" and those players will probably get banned. IMO, it's weak and I completely disagree with that approach. Things should be reviewed, because players can be using the system to circumvent their enemies and gain advantages.

In other words, the mods can be taken for a ride on fake claims of being offended just to win.

 

[DeletedUser3967]

I don't know what her village names were, so I can't say whether they were or weren't offensive. But if 3 legs felt it was necessary to change her village names, knowing there was a element of risk involved, then there really is no excuse. She deserves what she gets.

You people in ACTIVE are far far too biased.

You'd just in front of a speeding train to defend one another, even if they are wrong.

Man it up, admit you made a mistake and move on.

 

[DeletedUser]

Ok so speaking as someone not in ACTIVE is it ok for me to give my opinion?

Whatever the village names were for so many people to agree that they werent offensive shows pretty much that the mod should have thought the same to begin with, Doesnt matter what it is the mods automatic response is to side with the person making the claim as it isnt worth the trouble it would bring if theyre opinion was wrong and it infact was offensive and they done nothing about it.

 

[DeletedUser]

I don't know what her village names were, so I can't say whether they were or weren't offensive. But if 3 legs felt it was necessary to change her village names, knowing there was a element of risk involved, then there really is no excuse. She deserves what she gets.

You people in ACTIVE are far far too biased.

You'd just in front of a speeding train to defend one another, even if they are wrong.

Man it up, admit you made a mistake and move on.

Biased? Well, as you probably know, I have been sitting Deb every day for a few days, I talk to her most of any given day, and I assure you, she was not aware nor was I, that she would get banned for SapceBall quotes.

How was what 3legs did, a step too far? Obviously you are not going to quit talking about peoples bans when asked, so continue by all means. Might even break a few forum rules while your at it.

 

[DeletedUser]

Ok so speaking as someone not in ACTIVE is it ok for me to give my opinion?

Whatever the village names were for so many people to agree that they werent offensive shows pretty much that the mod should have thought the same to begin with, Doesnt matter what it is the mods automatic response is to side with the person making the claim as it isnt worth the trouble it would bring if theyre opinion was wrong and it infact was offensive and they done nothing about it.

Very valid point. From an administrative standpoint, they cannot make that mistake of letting their opinions judge what receives a ban. If someone sees it as offensive then it is "safer" for them to just agree. Now what they do have control over is the type of ban, but that may be as far as their opinion goes.

 

[DeletedUser3967]

My comments are in general. ACTIVE are always right, never wrong.

 

[DeletedUser]

Yes which is why they need that sort of tribal council idea in theyre own organisation, Then they have each others backing as of how to proceed.

 

[DeletedUser]

Yes which is why they need that sort of tribal council idea in theyre own organisation, Then they have each others backing as of how to proceed.

But think of how many reports come in a day for them. I am sure that probably wade through tons of claims and have to pick actual valid ones, and once they come to the valid ones, if they had to have a meeting to decide on each, well... that ban will come weeks later.

 

[DeletedUser]

DudeDestroyer -

I have been complaining about this very issue for quite some time. I've complained about it to both Lizy and another admin. What gets me is that the punishments and whether or not a rule is enforced is wildly erractic. I have seen players simply get their names changed...and then three legs gets banned for the same offense.. I saw a player just get his attacks cancelled and no punishment for sending an illegal (too quick) noble train, with nothing more than a warning.

I account sat a tribemate who got banned on another world because the mod tried to claim she was multi-accounting. He claimed this because her cookies were changing, when in fact she had deleted her cookies. She had premium and he refused to allow her to refute the ban until she went barb, then suddenly he got Lizy involved, but by then it was too late. If that was really a rule I'd be in big trouble! As a web developer I clear my cookies and temporary files on a regular basis for testing purposes! I also log on from multile IP's, depending on whether I'm at home, at work, or somewhere else.

I have an easy solution:

We have a dropdown box to select "breach of rules" etc...so how about this. There are very few actual rules. So you enter the player's name...you select the rule that was violated from a dropdown box...type your explanation...and that's it.

Each rule needs ot be assigned a set punishment and not a guideline for the admins to loosely follow as they see fit. Yes there are different circumstances...sometimes it's intentional, sometimes it's an accident. I say it doesn't matter. A rule is a rule and every punishment should be the same. If cross-attacks are a 20% village loss, then that should be the punishment for everyone that breaks it, no ifs, ands, or buts.

 

[DeletedUser]

Yeh i suppose your right but something has to be done about the easyness it is for someone to be wrongfully punished.

 

[DeletedUser]

Each rule needs ot be assigned a set punishment and not a guideline for the admins to loosely follow as they see fit. Yes there are different circumstances...sometimes it's intentional, sometimes it's an accident. I say it doesn't matter. A rule is a rule and every punishment should be the same. If cross-attacks are a 20% village loss, then that should be the punishment for everyone that breaks it, no ifs, ands, or buts.

Im not sure about this, I think it has to be flexible as it is a easy rule to break such as mass fakes, I think it should be judged on a basis of how many times this player has broken rules and such, If its the players first offense ever and they lose 20% of there villages because they accidentally fakes from one account and attacked from another, Seems that sometimes it has to be flexible.

 

[DeletedUser]

Stewy -

Sorry...left out that part. The punishments should be set but graded by # of offenses. So yeah, maybe first offense is 20%, second offense is permaban. Maybe it's 10, 20, and third is permaban...this would just need to be established.

If you make it too flexible it becomes unfair. That's my point. If the punishments are even across the board, maybe there won't be as many accidents as people will be more careful.

 

[DeletedUser]

Stewy -

Sorry...left out that part. The punishments should be set but graded by # of offenses. So yeah, maybe first offense is 20%, second offense is permaban. Maybe it's 10, 20, and third is permaban...this would just need to be established.

If you make it too flexible it becomes unfair. That's my point. If the punishments are even across the board, maybe there won't be as many accidents as people will be more careful.

I think you should consider putting that in a suggestions forum or something, because that's a damn good idea.

 

[DeletedUser]

Stewy -

Sorry...left out that part. The punishments should be set but graded by # of offenses. So yeah, maybe first offense is 20%, second offense is permaban. Maybe it's 10, 20, and third is permaban...this would just need to be established.

If you make it too flexible it becomes unfair. That's my point. If the punishments are even across the board, maybe there won't be as many accidents as people will be more careful.

Indeed that is an incredibly sound idea. I have actually seen a similar idea (think it was runescape back in the day) where you simply click the type of offense, put a brief description and then the persons name.

The one punishment for all is also a great idea. Not only for the players in question, but for the mods too because they do not have to go on a case by case basis. Seems like this idea benefits everyone. The question is now will they pay attention more to if the offense is valid rather than giving the punishment right away.

 

[DeletedUser]

Yeh and i agree to a point, but 20% of your villages as a punishment for a first offense is a bit harsh, Id say sort of work your way up, First a 48 hour ban, Then a week ban, then village deductions.

 

[DeletedUser]

First - Warning
Second - 20%
Third - Perm ban

For the more serious offense (multi accounting, cheating ect. take out the warning)

 

[DeletedUser]

Stewy -

I agree 20% is a bit harsh . The only reason I used that figure is because that is the current baseline that they use for computing punishment for cross-attacks.

 

[DeletedUser3967]

That's how the rules used to be.

20 % losses, 50% losses, 75% losses, i'm certain of it.

 

[DeletedUser71940]

Ah, the Active and Wookies actually agreeing on something? Tis will snow tomorrow.